albright appointees hold Òworld of the bibleÓ magazine ...volume 49, number 1...

Albright Appointees HoldColloquium at ACOR in Amman

Seven appointees of the W. F. Albright Institute of Ar-chaeological Research in Jerusalem presented papersat a colloquium held at ACOR in Amman on January

28, 1999. The papers are featured beginning on page 7 of thisNewsletter.

The group was hosted by ACOR Director Pierre Bikai andAssociate Director Patricia Bikai. In attendance were ACORFellows and staff, the Director of the Department of Antiq-uities of Jordan, faculty and students of the University ofJordan and Yarmouk University, and Friends of Archaeol-ogy in Jordan. Plans are currently being discussed for ACORto present a colloquium with papers by its Fellows and mem-bers of the Jordanian archaeological community next year atthe Albright in Jerusalem.

Spring 1999Volume 49, Number 1

12345678901234567890123456789123456789012345678901234567891234567890123456789012345678912345678901234567890123456789123456789012345678901234567891234567890123456789012345678912345678901234567890123456789123456789012345678901234567891234567890123456789012345678912345678901234567890123456789123456789012345678901234567891234567890123456789012345678912345678901234567890123456789123456789012345678901234567891234567890123456789012345678912345678901234567890123456789

INSIDE:

1999 Fellowship Poster

Journal SaleAIAR Appointees and their hosts at ACOR: Back, l–r: Ann Killebrew, SyGitin, Sandra Blakely, Laura Mazow, Shimon Gibson, Patricia Bikai; front,l–r: Robert Schick, Robert Mullins, Justin Lev-Tov, Pierre Bikai.

“WORLD OF THE BIBLE” MagazineLaunches with ASOR Endorsement

W ORLD OF THEBIBLE launched itspremier issue in

March/April with an issue de-voted to the Temple of Jerusalem.

An English language version ofthe highly regarded French maga-zine, Le Monde de la Bible, it willcontinue the traditions of its illus-trious parent, capturing thebeauty, mystery and excitement of five thousand years ofreligious history through articles written by the world’s lead-ing biblical scholars, and superb artwork and photography.Six colorful issues each year will feature an archaeologicaldiscovery, an exceptional exhibition, or a special preview.Book reviews, exhibition schedules, archaeological reports,transcripts of conferences, and diaries of cultural journeysare also planned for every issue.

ASOR’s endorsement and promotion of the magazine inthe United States will help to ensure a healthy start. For itspart, ASOR will have new avenues for fulfilling its missionof reaching out to the public, new opportunities for devel-oping its membership base, and a marketing outlet forASOR’s publications and other projects. In addition, plansare underway for sym-posia to be heldthroughout the UnitedStates, and for orga-nized travel opportuni-ties to the Middle East.

2

CAPReevaluates its Role

page 2

Dorot & LindstromFellowship Information

page 5

Missives

page 6

AIAR Fellowsat ACOR in Amman

Papers

page 7

News&Notices

page 23

Annual MeetingInformation

page 26

Meeting Calendar

page 27

Committee on Archaeological PolicyReevaluates its Role

During the ASOR Meetings in Orlando, the ASORVision 2000 discussion group #1 focused on thequestion: “What means and forms should ASOR

support of field projects take and how should ASOR relateto overseas centers’ activities?” Stuart Swiny, former directorof CAARI and David McCreery, former director of ACOR,served as the discussion leaders.

At the beginning of the discussion it was noted that theissue of ASOR’s relationship with field projects and theoverseas centers has been a matter of debate for decades. Itwas nevertheless agreed that a thorough discussion of thisissue is particularly needed at this time. The following is asummary of some of the observations and points madeduring the course of the discussion.

Over the past fifteen to twenty years, the overseas instituteshave experienced phenonenal growth. New facilities havebeen built, purchased, and/or improved; the program—including the establishment of new fellowships—hasexpanded and become more diverse; budgets have growndramatically while at the same time the centers have beconeless financially dependent on ASOR. The overseas instituteshave developed into relatively independent “young adults”and the relationship with ASOR, the “parent” organization,is clearly different than it was some twenty years ago.

Likewise, the number and nature of field projects are quitedifferent than they were ten to twenty years ago. Today’sfield projects tend to be larger, more interdisciplinary andmore expensive than they used to be. There are also manymore projects focusing on the non-biblical (prehistoric andlate Classical/Islamic) periods than was the case in the past.The development of local universities with strongarchaeological programs has produced a number of highlyqualified local archaeologists, reducing the necessity and/or desirability of inviting foreign scholars to initiate newarchaeological projects. All of these developments, as wellas the unpredictable political situation, are forcing foreignproject directors to reexamine and redefine their relationshipwith the host country, with ASOR’s overseas institutes, andwith ASOR itself.

In light of these changing circumstances, what is ASOR’srole in supporting field projects? The ASOR fellowshipprogram was seen as being extremely important for both fieldprojects and the overseas centers and should certainly becontinued and expanded if possible. Access to accommo-dations, excavation and survey equipment, work space and,above all, library resources were noted as major contributionsthe overseas institutes make to field projects and thus worthyof special support by ASOR. The ASOR Journal Exchangewas singled out as having been a particularly importantprogram in the past. ASOR’s publication programs were alsopointed out as a major means of supporting the centers andfield projects as was the annual meeting.

The role of ASOR’s Committee on Archaeological Policy(CAP) was the focus of a fair amount of discussion. Althoughthere was universal agreement that CAP performs a vitalfunction in providing peer review for field projects, it wasalso felt that CAP could and should do more to encourage,

3

CAP ReportAt the November 1998 ASOR Meetings in Orlando, Florida,CAP reviewed a total of 48 proposals and approved 24 fieldprojects and 23 publication projects (see page 4). Virtuallyall field projects also have publication aspects associated withthe proposals. One project was denied affiliation but invitedto resubmit a proposal.

A summary of affiliated projects by geographical regionsis as follows:

Carthage — 1 publication projectCyprus — 3 publication, 2 field projectsIsrael — 13 publication, 5 field projectsJordan — 5 publication, 16 field projectsSyria — 1 field projectWest Bank -- 1 publication project

Letters informing project directors of the decisions andrecommendations made by the committee in Orlando weresent out in early January 1999. Over the next month, the CAPFellowship Committee will be reviewing applications andannouncing awards by late March.

Plans are underway for a special CAP meeting in New YorkCity on April 30, to discuss and finalize reforms dealing withthe affiliation application procedures, the evaluation process,the annual CAP inspection trips, as well as other initiatives.At this point, I expect about twelve committee members tobe in attendance at this Spring meeting.

The CAP inspection trip for 1999 is still in the initialplanning stages but will take place from approximately June6 to July 15, 1999. An attempt will be made to visit all 24affiliated field projects in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Syria, andthe West Bank. I am hopeful that a number of CAP memberswill be able to participate in the inspection trip this year. Weanticipate visiting fewer “unaffiliated” projects than in thepast and spending more time visiting “affiliated” projects.Special emphasis will be placed on new projects and youngproject directors.

Chair of the Committee on Archaeology Policy

assist, and ensure high academic standards of the projects itoversees. Some questioned the value of CAP affiliation sincethe host countries do not insist on it and there is oftenminimal interaction between the project directors and theCAP Committee. A number of suggestions were made thatwould call for a more proactive approach by CAP, forexample: 1. Holding consultations with project directorsduring the annual meetings; 2. Assisting Project Directors inidentifying and recruiting specialists; 3. Spending more timevisiting ASOR-affiliated projects (especially new projects),and discussing strategy with project directors during theannual CAP inspection trip; 4. Simplifying the applicationprocess and making electronic applications available (whichwould cut down on paper as well as speeding up thedistribution of proposals and the review process); and 5.Organizing inter-regional, problem-oriented researchprojects that would encourage international scholarlycooperation, spawn new projects, and provide new topicsfor presentation at ASOR Annual Meetings.

The discussion regarding a rethinking of CAP’s missionand modus operandi continued at the CAP meeting in Orlando.The Committee was unanimous regarding the need forsignificant reforms. Throughout the winter the Committeehas continued the discussion begun in Orlando and will meetin New York on April 30, 1999 in order to discuss, vote on,and begin implementing new procedures.

The Vision 2000 discussions did not produce consensusregarding the role of ASOR with field projects and theoverseas institutes but they did provide a useful beginningfor a more careful examination of these issues. I trust thatthis discussion will continue and culminate in meaningfulchanges within the ASOR organization.

CAP GRANT RECIPIENTS -- 1999

1. Edward F. Campbell, $1,200Publication expenses for the JointExpedition to Tell Balatah-Shechem

2. A. Bernard Knapp, $600Publication expenses for the SydneyCyprus Survey Project (SCSP)

3. Paul F. Jacobs, $1,289Travel expenses for the ComputerProgrammer for the Lahav ResearchProject, Phase III

4. Danielle A. Parks, $1,305Field expenses for the KourionAmathus Gate Cemetery Excavation

5. Megan A. Perry, $1,000Travel expenses for Remote SensingTechnician for the Bir MadhkurExcavation & Survey Project

6. John J. Shea, $750Field expenses for the MiddlePaleolithic of NW Jordan: Excavationat ar-Rasfa

7. Timothy P. Harrison, $750Consolidation and Preservationexpenses on the Tell MadabaArchaeological Project (TMAP)

4

Project (p=publication; f=field) P.I. / Director(s)

TunisiaCarthage Punic Project (p) L. Stager, J. Greene

CyprusKholetria-Ortos Neolithic Excavations (p) A. SimmonsKourion-Amathus Gate Cemetery (f) D. ParksMitsero-Politiko Regional Survey (SCSP) (p) B. KnappPolitiko Phorades Excavation (SCSP) (f) B. KnappSotira Kaminoudhia (p) S. Swiny

IsraelCaesarea Maritima Vault Project (p) J.A. Blakely, W.J. BennetCombined Caesarea Expeditions (CCE) (f) K.G. Holum, A. Raban, J. PatrichJoint Expedition to Tell el-Hesi (p) J.A. BlakelyJoint Sepphoris Regional Project (JSP) (p) C. Meyers, E. MeyersKhirbet Cana (f) D. R. EdwardsLahav Research Project, Phases I-II (p) J.D. SegerLahav Research Project, Phase III (p) P. Jacobs, O. BorowskiLahav Research Project (Tell Halif) (f) P. JacobsMeiron Excavation Project (p) C. and E. MeyersNahal Tillah Excavation (p) T. LevyNeo-Assyrian Project (p) S. GitinRekhes Nafha Project (f) B.A. Saidel, S. RosenSepphoris Regional Project (Sepphoris 85-89) (p) E. Meyers, C. MeyersSepphoris Regional Project (‘Ein Zippori) (p) C. Meyers, E. MeyersShiqmim Excavation, Phase II (p) T. LevyTel Miqne-Ekron Publications Project (p) S. Gitin, T. DothanTel Kedesh Excavation (f) S. Herbert, A. BerlinTell el-Wawiyat Excavation Project (p) J.P. Dessel, B.L. Wisthoff, B.A. NakhaiZeitah Excavation (f) R.E. Tappy

Jordan‘Ain Ghazal Project (f) G. RollefsonArchaeology and Environment of the Dead Sea Plain (f) P. Edwards, S. Falconer, P. Fall, P. MacumberBir Madhkur Excavation and Survey (f) A.M. Smith, M. PerryBioarchaeology of Byzantine North Jordan

(Yasileh and Yamun) (f) J.C. Rose*Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain in Jordan

(Bab edh-Dhra, Numeira) (p) W. Rast, R.T. SchaubGhwair I Neolithic (p) A. Simmons, M. NajjarHumeima Excavation Project (f) J. Oleson, R. FooteJebel Hamrat Fidan (f) T. Levy, R. AdamsJordan Valley Village Project (Tell Abu en-Ni’aj) (f) S. Falconer, P. Fall, J. JonesJordan Valley Village Project (Tell Dhahret Umm al-Marar) (f) J. Jones, S. Falconer, P. FallKerak Resources Project (al-Mudaybi‘) (f) G.L. MattinglyKhirbet Iskander Excavation (f) S. Richard, J. LongLimes Arabicus Project - publication S.T. ParkerMadaba Plains Project (f) S. LaBianca, R. Younker, L. HerrMiddle Paleolithic of NW Jordan (Ar Rasfa) (f) J.J. SheaPetra Great Temple (f) M.S. JoukowskyRoman Aqaba Project (f) S.T. ParkerTafila-Busayra Archaeological Survey (f) B. MacDonaldTell Madaba Archaeological Project (f) T.P. HarrisonTell Nimrin Project (p) J.W. Flanagan, D.W. McCreery, K.N. YassineUmm el Jimal Project (p) B. deVries

SyriaTell Qarqur Excavation (f) R.H. Dornemann

West BankJoint Expedition to Tell Balatah E.F. Campbell

_____________________________*This project had CAP affiliation last year but was inadvertently omitted from the list of affiliated projects published in the summer1998 (Vol. 48, #2, p. 14) ASOR Newsletter.

Committee onArchaeological

Policy—

ASOR-AFFILIATEDPROJECTS,

1999

5

DOROT FOUNDATION RENEWS TRAVEL TOANNUAL MEETING SUPPORT

ASOR has received notification that the Dorot Foun-dation in Providence, RI has again awarded a grantto provide assistance to graduate students of ad-

vanced status with travel expenses to the ASOR AnnualMeeting in Orlando in November. This program is designedto encourage and support participation in the Annual Meet-ing by graduate students during their final years of academicpreparation. Seven grants can be awarded for the 1999 An-nual Meeting.

Conditions governing the application process and the dis-tribution of the grant monies are as follows:1. Individuals must be students duly enrolled in a program

of graduate or advanced professional studies and in ABDstatus or otherwise in the final year of candidacy for theirdegree program. Note: Individuals receiving degrees af-ter September 1998 will also qualify.

2. Individuals must be student members of ASOR and beduly registered for participation at the Annual Meeting.

3. Funds are for expenses related to travel to the Annual Meet-ing in Orlando, Florida only.

4. $1000 is the maximum grant that can be made available toany one individual.Applications for Dorot Annual Meeting Travel Grants can

be made as follows:Applicants must submit a brief application letter to “Dorot

Annual Meeting Travel Grants” c/o Dr. RudolphDornemann, Executive Director, American Schools of Ori-ental Research at Boston University, 656 Beacon Street, FifthFloor, Boston, MA 02215-2010. Application letters must in-clude the following information:a. An affirmation regarding participation in a graduate pro-

gram with details of current status (per #1 above).b.Proof of ASOR student membership and Annual Meeting

registration (per #2 above). NOTE: Application for Stu-dent membership and/or forms for Annual Meeting reg-istration may accompany application letters for DorotGrants.

c. A statement with details regarding the nature of partici-pation at the Meeting, e.g., presenting a paper, serving ona discussion panel, serving on a committee, attending aworkshop or other session with special professional rel-evance, hoping to make contacts referent to job prospects,or otherwise indicating why it is of professional impor-tance to attend.

d.A detailed estimate of the cost of travel involved.e. In addition, applicants must secure a letter from an aca-

demic advisor affirming their program status and indicat-ing why attendance and participation in the Annual Meet-ing is important. NOTE: This letter should be secured bythe applicant and submitted along with other applicationmaterials.Completed applications will be reviewed by a committee

of three ASOR Members appointed by the ASOR Presidentfor this purpose. Applications will be accepted through Sep-tember 15 and notification of decisions of grant awards willbe made as soon as possible thereafter.

Successful applicants will be advanced support monies re-

lated to cost estimates provided, less 10%. The 10% will beheld in reserve by ASOR pending submission of bone-fidereceipts for all expenses along with a brief report summariz-ing benefits received through participation at the meetings.

The Dorot Foundation has a well-established tradition ofproviding support for students representing the next gen-eration of scholarship in the disciplines of Near Eastern ar-chaeology and biblical studies. ASOR sincerely thanks theDorot Foundation for providing this special gift of assistancefor our advanced student constituency.

LINDSTROM FOUNDATIONGIFT AGAIN PRESENTS $1 FOR $2

CHALLENGE FOR STUDENT SUPPORT

The trustees of the Lindstrom Foundation have againprovided ASOR with a grant for the support of stu-dents who want to attend and participate in ASOR’s

Annual Meeting in 1999. This year the Lindstrom Founda-tion again allocated a maximum of $2,000 but again on thebasis that the foundation would matched gifts on a one fortwo basis, i.e. that each $1 of the Lindstrom grant be matchedby $2 contributed by others for this purpose.

The Lindstrom Foundation gift will provide for StudentService Scholarships which will require students to provideservices of up to 20 hours at the Annual Meeting. Servicesinvolved will include assisting with registration and audio-visuals at program sessions, and aiding Program Commit-tee members with other set-up and arrangement needs.Scholarships of up to $500 will be awarded based on theparticipant’s needs. Interested individuals should send aletter of interest to the ASOR Office in Boston, ASOR locatedat Boston University, 656 Beacon Street, 5th floor, Boston,MA 02215-2010, attention Britt Hartenberger, 617-353-6570;Fax: (617) 353-6575; E-mail <[email protected]>. (Priority con-sideration will be given to applications received by June 1,1999.) Applications will be accepted through September 15,1999 and notification of decisions on grant awards will bemade as soon as possible thereafter.

Tax deductible contributions for matching funds are cur-rently being solicited. Individuals interested in supportingthis program should send gifts directly to the LindstromFoundation’s office at 2128 Alvarado St., San Leandro, CA94577. Checks should be made payable the Lindstrom Foun-dation for Archaeological Research and Development. Let-ters of thanks will be sent directly to the contributors by theFoundation and donations can be counted as charitable do-nations for tax purposes.

Newsletter Copy Deadlines

Issue Copy Deadline

Summer 1999 June 14

Fall 1999 September 13

Winter 2000 December 20

Spring 2000 March 13

6

U.S. Senate Considers Treatyto Protect Cultural Property

During Armed Conflict

On January 6, 1999, PresidentClinton sent to the U.S. Senatea request for ratification of the

Hague Convention for the Protection ofCultural Property in the Event of ArmedConflict. While this event received littlenotice amidst the more sensational newsstories then consuming the media, theprospect of U. S. action on this impor-tant treaty was welcomed by archaeolo-gists and others who advocate interna-tional cooperation to protect the world’scultural heritage. But still broader sup-port will be needed to encourage theSenate to bring the agreement to a vote.

Concluded in 1954 in the aftermathof World War II, the Hague Conventionprovides guidelines for the protectionof monuments, archaeological sites, ar-tifacts and collections during wartime,and requires that each nation makepreparations during time of peace forsafeguarding its cultural propertyagainst the foreseeable effects of anarmed conflict. In addition to damagefrom direct military action, it seeks toprevent theft and vandalism againstcultural property, and provides for pro-tection within occupied territories. Theobligations may be waived only in casesof imperative military necessity. Ninety-five nations are now party to the Con-vention.

While the U.S. participated in thedrafting of the Hague Convention,various Cold War concerns at the timehad prevented U.S. ratification.Nevertheless, since then U.S. militarypolicy and operations have beenconducted in a manner consistent withthe Convention, which in many wayswas based on practices of U.S forcesduring World War II. In the past fewyears the treaty has been thoroughlyreviewed by the Pentagon and theDepartment of State, both of which nowfully support its ratification. Formaladherence by the United States will be

public testimony to the nation’scommitment to protect culturalresources and an acknowledgement ofalready existing practices.

ASOR members, of course, have beenparticularly concerned about threats tosites and monuments of historical andarchaeological importance during morerecent regional conflicts in the MiddleEast. These concerns found expressionin the “Statement of ASOR Policy onPreservation and Protection of Archaeo-logical Resources’’ (BASOR 309 [1998]2), adopted by the ASOR Board of Trust-ees in November 1995, which calls forU.S. ratification of the Hague Conven-tion and urges all countries to adhereto its terms.

While the Convention is consideredto be non-controversial, members ofCongress have many other prioritiesand will probably need expressions ofinterest to encourage them to act. Thetreaty has been referred to the SenateForeign Relations Committee, whichmust vote to place it before the full Sen-ate for final ratification. ASOR memberswishing to express their support maywrite to the chairman of the ForeignRelations Committee, Jesse Helms (NC),and to the Ranking Minority Member,Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (DE). If a Senatorfrom your state is a member of the com-mittee, a letter to him/her would be es-pecially helpful. Letters - referring toTreaty Document No. 106-1 - should beaddressed to the individual senator,Senate Foreign Relations Commiteee,United States Senate, Washington, DC20510. A full list of committee membersfollows:

Chair Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (DE), JesseHelms (NC), Richard G. Luger (IW),Paul Coverdell (GA), Chuck Hager(NE), Gordon Smith (OR), Craig Tho-mas (WY), Rod Grams (MN), JohnAshcroft (MO), Bill Prist (TM), SamBrownback (KS), Paul S. Sarbanes (MD),Christopher J Dodd (CT), John Kerry(MA), Russell D. Feingold (WI), BarbaraBoxer (CA), Robert Torricelli (NJ), PaulWellstone (MN).

Ellen Herscher

ASOR Inaugurates a LectureSeries in the Boston Area

As the opportunity has pre-sented itself, ASOR has spon-sored lectures for its members.

This has not been done in a consistentfashion but we are hopeful that theASOR Centennial will provide a boostto this program and make lecturesreadily available to more of its indi-vidual and institutional members. Forthree years in Baltimore, ASOR workedwith the Department of Near EasternStudies at Johns Hopkins University,Baltimore Hebrew University and otherlocal ASOR institutional members topresent a regular program of lectures.This effort lasted and until now has notbeen picked up for the Boston area.Now that ASOR is settled into its Bos-ton offices and is receiving many ben-efits from its relationship with BostonUniversity, it is time to move ahead witha modest lecture program effort. Thiswill serve to give ASOR a little more vis-ibility and allow us to make an addi-tional contribution to the scholarly pro-grams of the Boston area.

Three lectures have been scheduledfor the Spring and additional lectureswill be scheduled in the fall. Starting inthe year 2000 we hope to continue aspart of ASOR’s Centennial lecture pro-gram. The first lecture was on March 17,1999, “End of an Empire: New Evidenceon the Collapse of Urartu” by BostonUniversity Professor and ASORBaghdad Committee Chair PaulZimansky. Dr. Robert Schick a fellow atthe W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeo-logical Research in Jerusalem lecturedon March 22, 1999 on “Christianity inSouthern Jordan in the Byzantine Pe-riod.” On April 21, 1999, ASOR’s Execu-tive Director, Dr. Rudolph H.Dornemann, will lecture on “The Searchfor Qarqara: Renewed ASOR Excava-tions at Tell Qarqur, in the Orontes Val-ley, Syria.”

The Boston lectures have been co-sponsored with the Department of Ar-chaeology at Boston University, the Bos-ton chapter of the Archaeological Insti-tute of America, the Semitic Museumand the Department of Religion atHarvard University.

Rudy DornemannExecutive Director

A m m a n • B a g h d a d

D a m a s c u s • J e r u s a l e m • N i c o s i a

7

The mound of Rehov (Tell es-Sarem), located in the fer-tile alluvial plain at the strategic juncture of the Jezreeland Jordan Valleys, is 3 miles south of Tel Beth Shean

and 6.5 miles west of Pella. The Rehov excavation project,directed by Prof. Amihai Mazar on behalf of the Institute ofArchaeology of the Hebrew University, has just completedits second field season.1 The expedition is funded by a gen-erous grant from Mr. John Camp of Minneapolis, MN.

Rehov is best known by the reference to it in the victorystele of Seti I (early thirteenth century BCE), which was dis-covered at Tel Beth Shean in 1928 by the University of Penn-sylvania excavation team. According to the hieroglyphic text,three cities of the region—Pehel, Hamath and Yenoam—re-belled against the Egyptian garrison at Beth Shean. Appar-ently, Rehov chose to remain loyal to the Pharaoh, so therebellious rulers of Pella and Hamath set out to besiege thecity. In the inscription, Seti boasts about how he success-fully put down this insurrection. A second reference to Rehovappears in Shishak’s list of conquered cities (ca. 925 BCE).

The tel, which is approximately 25 acres in size and one ofthe largest sites in Israel, is divided equally into an upperand a lower mound (fig. 1). To study the stratigraphy ofboth parts, sondages were laid out on the western slope ofthe lower city (Area D), as well as on the eastern and north-ern slopes of the upper city (Areas A and B). Fields werealso opened that would provide more lateral exposure at thewestern and eastern ends of the lower city (Areas C, E andF).

To date, the excavations have shown that the lower moundwas inhabited from at least the Middle Bronze Age throughthe late tenth or mid-ninth centuries BCE. After the lowercity was destroyed, the settlement at Rehov was restrictedto the acropolis. It was this reduced town of 12.5 acres thatfell to Tiglath-pileser III in 733–32 BCE. A phase of post-destruction settlement continued until the end of the eighthcentury BCE. The mound was abandoned until the appear-ance of villages in the Early Islamic and Medieval periods,which were concentrated at the highest point of the moundin the southwest.

The focus of this paper is on the results from those areasand strata that best illustrate the history of the Iron Age IIoccupation. The evidence is also related to the current de-bate concerning the archaeological character and chronol-ogy of Iron Age IIA, the tenth–ninth centuries BCE.

Area D. In Area D, a 25 m long step trench revealed ninebuilding phases spanning the thirteenth through the tenthcenturies BCE (LB IIB–Iron IIA). The earliest of these levelsis most likely the phase associated with Rehov of the Seti Istele. Segments of a large building were uncovered fromthis period, but the horizontal exposure was insufficient todetermine its plan. From the remains discovered so far, thereis little question that further investigations into the city from

this period could contribute greatly to our understanding ofthe Late Bronze Age. More relevant to the discussion of theIron Age II towns are the three eleventh century phases thatpreceded the tenth century occupation.

All three eleventh century phases yielded typical Iron AgeI pottery in the well-known Canaanite painted tradition. Redslipped and burnished pottery is absent from these levels.Of special interest are the few Mycenean IIIC sherds, whichprobably originated from earlier strata, and fragments ofPhilistine bichrome pottery. The uppermost phase in the steptrench produced mixed Iron Age I and tenth century pot-tery, including some red slipped and burnished sherds. Itappears that this phase is contemporary with Stratum 2 ofthe lower city in Area C.

Area C. Area C contained two relevant strata. The earlierone, Stratum 2, is dated to the tenth century, while the later,Stratum 1, has been assigned to the terminal phase of thelower mound, some time between the late tenth to mid-ninthcenturies BCE.

Stratum 2 produced a magnificently preserved buildingwith mudbrick walls standing 18 courses high. This build-ing existed in at least two phases, and appears to have beenpart of two or three building complexes. The structure wasapparently destroyed in an earthquake, judging from thenature of the damage to the walls. Red slipped and handburnished pottery were abundant, signifying a change fromthe previous eleventh century ceramic tradition. The onlypainted sherds that were found were small quantities of blackdecoration on red slip.

The top of the damaged mudbrick building served as thefoundation of a later structure belonging to Stratum 1. Thisbuilding, which had two phases and a somewhat differentplan, ended in fierce conflagration. Pottery sealed in the de-struction of Stratum 1 included the same red slipped andburnished ceramic tradition known from the previous stra-tum. It also included vessels such as “hippo” jars, a redslipped amphoriskos painted with geometric designs and apalm tree, and an imported Cypriot Bichrome jug. Theequivalent stratum in Area E to the east produced a mag-nificent fenestrated pottery cult stand reminiscent of thosefrom Taanach and Pella, which are generally dated to thetenth century BCE.

Area E. Area E produced parts of buildings and a spaciouscourtyard that extended beyond the limits of the excavation.Of special interest in the courtyard is an almost square plat-form with a line of four upright stones at its southern end.Three of them recall what are often interpreted as mazzebothor standing stones. Testifying to the ceremonial character ofthis area are the associated finds. These include a limestoneslab in front of the podium that may have been an offeringtable, the cult stand mentioned above, a significant quantityof animal bones, two ceramic female figurines, several chal-

The Excavations at Tel Rehov: The Chronology of Iron Age II

Robert A. Mullins, James A. Montgomery Fellow, AIARPh.D. Candidate, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Papers Presented at the Albright Appointees’ Colloquium at ACOR in Amman, Jordan, January 1999

8


Fig. 1. Top plan, Tel Rehov.

9

ices, and a number of ovens that could have been used tocook ritual meals. The data taken together suggest that thismay have been a small neighborhood cult area. Area E suf-fered the same destruction in Stratum 1 as Area C to the west.

The Tel Rehov excavations have so far produced an im-portant corpus of pottery from well-stratified contexts thatwill most certainly enhance the discussion of the chronol-ogy of Iron Age II. Rich assemblages with dozens of com-plete vessels are well-attested in the destruction of Stratum1. These include the hippo jars, a large number of early shal-low cooking pots with elongated rims, chalices, and othervessels characteristic of the tenth century and the early ninthcentury BCE. The best ceramic parallels are to be foundmainly in Megiddo VA–IVB, Taanach IIA–IIB, Jezreel (finalphase), Hazor X–VIII, and the fortress of Hurvat Rosh Zayit.

It is precisely this assemblage that is at the center of thecurrent debate over the chronology of the tenth-ninth centu-ries BCE.2 The essence of this discussion is the suggestionby Israel Finkelstein (based upon the finds from the finalphase at Jezreel) to lower to the ninth century BCE potterytraditionally dated to the tenth century, and to move to thetenth century BCE assemblages generally attributed to theeleventh century, such as Megiddo VIA.

Of critical importance for determining an absolute datefor the end of Stratum 1 is a series of nine radiocarbon datesderived from large quantities of charred grain sealed in thedestruction of Area C. The University of Arizona laboratorydated these samples with remarkable precision to 2750 +/-16 years BP. The calibrated dates were 906–843 BCE (65%probability) or 916–832 BCE (98% probability). Ironically,these dates for the end of Stratum 1 fall precisely within thetime range of the current debate concerning the Iron Age II.The lower date of this time-scale puts the end of the Stratum1 town at approximately the same time as the destruction of

Jezreel, while the upper date falls within a decade or twoafter the campaign of Shishak. Carbon-14 samples takenfrom wood logs used in the construction of Stratum 1, how-ever, point to a date in the tenth century BCE.

The excavations at Jezreel have indeed shown that pot-tery similar to Megiddo VA–IVB and Hazor X continued toappear in the ninth century, and thus, it is possible that Stra-tum 1 at Tel Rehov was destroyed during that century. Thecrux of the issue, however, is when the transition in the ce-ramic industry from painted decoration to red slipped andburnished pottery actually began. Is the conventional viewcorrect in maintaining that this change occurred in the tenthcentury, or is Finkelstein correct in arguing that it occurredafter Shishak’s campaign around 925 BCE? The answer is tobe found in the pottery repertoire from Stratum 2, in whichred slipped and burnished pottery first appears at Tel Rehov.This stratum must predate the construction of Stratum 1 bya considerable amount of time, since both Strata 1 and 2 haveseveral sub-phases. A. Mazar believes that the relativestratigraphy of the site provides reasonable support for dat-ing Stratum 2 with its two sub-phases to the tenth centuryBCE. Thus, the evidence from Tel Rehov demonstrates thevalidity of the traditional chronology.

1 The author wishes to thank Prof. Mazar for permission topresent the Rehov material in the AIAR colloquium at ACORand to submit this text for publication. A more comprehen-sive report by A. Mazar will appear in a forthcoming issueof the Israel Exploration Journal.2 I. Finkelstein, “The Archaeology of the United Monarchy:An Alternative View.” Levant 28 (1996) 177–87; A. Mazar,“Iron Age Chronology: A Reply to I. Finkelstein” Levant 29(1997) 157–67; I. Finkelstein,“Bible Archaeology or Archae-ology of Palestine in the Iron Age? A Rejoinder” Levant 30(1998) 167–73.

Renewed Excavations in Palace 6000 (Area L) at Tel Megiddo

Ann E. Killebrew, Research Fellow, AIARDepartment of Archaeology, University of Haifa

The biblical site of Tel Megiddo is located on the west-ern edge of the Jezreel Valley, along the ancient routeof the Via Maris connecting Egypt with Mesopotamia.

With its twenty archaeological layers spanning the Neolithicthrough Persian/Hellenistic levels, and its association withArmageddon, Tel Megiddo has been a focal point of archaeo-logical exploration for nearly a century. Several series of ex-cavations have been conducted at Megiddo—the earliest in1903–1905 by G. Schumacher, the large-scale excavations bythe University of Chicago from 1925–1939, and the limited,but controversial, excavations by Y. Yadin in the 1960s. Thecurrent excavations are directed by Israel Finkelstein, DavidUssishkin, and Baruch Halpern under the auspices of Tel AvivUniversity, with Pennsylvania State University as the seniorAmerican partner. The consortium institutions are LoyolaMarymount University and the University of Southern Cali-

fornia, with the participation of Michael Niemann from theUniversity of Rostock, Germany.

One of the goals of the 1998 season of excavation includeda return to the Iron II area of excavation first explored byY.ÊYadin where he uncovered parts of a massive public struc-ture, which he interpreted as a bit hilani palace dating to theSolomonic period. This building, which he attributed to Stra-tum VA/IVB and referred to as Palace 6000, was covered bya series of Stratum IVA pillared buildings that have usuallybeen interpreted as either stables or storerooms (fig. 2). Therenewed excavations in the Palace 6000 area were fundedby the Nature Protection and National Parks Authoritywithin the framework of the current Tel Aviv University ex-cavations and are part of a larger interpretation program topresent Tel Megiddo to the public.

During Y. Yadin’s original excavations in this area over

10

thirty years ago, he uncovered several sections of a largemonumental building that he interpreted as a palace, attrib-uting it to Stratum VA/IVB in the tenth century BCESolomonic period. This building was one of the major cor-nerstones used for the dating of the tenth century and ourunderstanding of the Solomonic period in Israel. Based on are-evaluation of the evidence at Megiddo and the recent ex-cavations at Tel Jezreel, I. Finkelstein and D. Ussishkin havechallenged this date, preferring a ninth century BCE date—a theory that, if correct, will affect the dating and interpreta-tion of every Iron Age II site in Israel, Palestine, and Jordanas well as revise our understanding of the Solomonic periodand biblical texts.

During the 1998 season in Area L, our first goal was todocument properly the uncovered architectural remains ofY. Yadin’s original probes. Unfortunately, the excavated sec-tions to date of the Stratum VA/IVB public building arepoorly preserved (in most cases only the foundations remain)due to the later robbing and reuse of the ashlar stones andthe construction of the pillared buildings directly on top ofthe palace. During this first season of the Tel Aviv Univer-sity excavation in Palace 6000, it was not possible to exca-vate more of it (sections that had not been uncovered alreadyby Yadin) due to the extremely well-preserved pillared build-ings that we discovered on top of the palace.

Unfortunately, no indication of an absolute date of thisbuilding has been forthcoming, thus leaving the dating ofPalace 6000 an open debate. It is hoped that during the nextseason of excavations, in the year 2000, additional sectionsof this building will be excavated.

In contrast to the limited new information regarding thepalace, large sections of two well-preserved pillared build-ings, assigned to Stratum IVA, were uncovered. These build-ings, traditionally dated to the ninth century BCE, were re-ferred to as the northern stables by the University of Chi-cago. Along with the southern stable complex, these build-ings have also been a focus of debate. The southern stablesat Tel Megiddo were completely excavated by the Univer-sity of Chicago, thus precluding any re-examination of thesestructures. However the northern stable complex was notcompletely uncovered, providing the Tel Aviv University

team an opportunity to reinvestigate these buildings in thenorth.

Two main theories have been proposed for the function ofthese structures as either stables or storerooms. Several fea-tures of these pillared buildings are especially important.Each tripartite building consists of a central plastered aisleand a cobbled aisle flanking either side. The structure is di-vided by two rows of pillars and alternating troughs. A num-ber of these troughs, which are carved out of a single lime-stone block and are all of a standard size, were discovered insitu during the 1998 season. Unfortunately, most of the pil-lars and troughs were robbed out in antiquity. The robbers’trenches were clearly visible as we excavated the two tripar-tite buildings. In addition, the rooms themselves were al-most completely void of finds; only a handful of diagnosticsherds were recovered during excavation.

In an attempt to solve the mystery of the function of thesestructures, dozens of sediment samples were taken fromabove and below the floor levels. These samples will be ex-amined by several laboratories and by Arlene Rosen for cluesto the type of activities that occurred in the pillared struc-tures.

In addition to the well-known arguments already pub-lished regarding the function of these buildings, several newsuggestions were raised during the course of excavations.Though generally interpreted as structures used for the long-term stabling of horses, other options do exist. These build-ings and their general plan may have been suitable for short-term stabling of horses for breeding or for sale and trade. Inmy opinion, the lack of artifacts in the rooms together withthe standardized shape and placement of the troughs be-tween the pillars lend strong support to the theory that thesetripartite buildings served as stables, and not storerooms.

Lastly, one of the main reasons for excavating this area,with its impressive monuments from the Iron Age II, was itsarchaeological value to the public. Tel Megiddo is one of themost frequently visited national parks in the country, withapproximately 200,000 visitors per year. Monumental IronAge buildings from the biblical period are not often presentedto the public—even though most foreign tourists come toIsrael to “experience” the Bible. Present plans include theinterpretation of these buildings by utilizing a multimedia,non-intrusive on-site computer technology termed“TimeScope,”which was developed, together with IBM, bythe East Flanders government at the medieval site of Enamein Flanders, Belgium. The TimeScope technology combinesa live-time video camera image over which the reconstruc-tion and interpretation of the site is told to the public. AtMegiddo, the interpretation will focus on a reconstructionand interpretation of Palace 6000 and the pillared buildingsin the archaeological and historical context of Megiddo andtheir biblical significance. In order to convey the story ofMegiddo to the public, the interpretation will present a dra-matization based on characters representing different timeperiods and different perspectives. Our goal is to produceboth an archaeologically and historically accurate interpre-tation that will also entertain the public and speak the lan-guage of the twenty-first century.


Fig. 2. Tel Megiddo, Area L, looking northwest. Foreground: viewof the ashlar foundations of Palace 6000 (Stratum VA/IVB); back-ground: tripartite pillared building (Stratum IVA) constructed overpalace. Photographed by Ann E. Killebrew.

11

For almost a century, beginning with P. A. S. Macalister’s1914 pioneering study, the Philistines have been con-sidered primarily an Iron Age I phenomenon. Only

recently has this perception been drastically altered by theresults of the long term excavation project at Tel Miqne, thePhilistine capital city of Ekron. While this project has pro-duced significant Iron Age I evidence to address the ques-tions of who the Philistines were and where they come from,its most dramatic contribution has been to show that thePhilistines also had a history during Iron Age II and werenot, as previously thought, assimilated after 1000 BCE intothe majority culture of Canaanites, Phoenicians or Israelites.The evidence from the seventh century, which demonstratesthat the Philistines existed with their own unique materialculture until the end of the Iron Age, albeit severely affectedby a long process of acculturation, is the subject of this pa-per.

Tel Miqne was chosen as the site for a new excavationproject focused on Philistine studies because, as a border site,located on the frontier between Philistia and the JudaeanShephelah, it offered the potential to provide data that wouldhighlight the development of Philistine material culture asreflected by the impact of, and contrast with, Judaean mate-rial culture. Ekron is also located at the center of two heavilyresearched regions—Philistia and western Judah—whichwould provide a broader interregional context for the resultsof the excavation. This project, a joint effort of the AlbrightInstitute and the Hebrew University directed by my col-league Trude Dothan and myself, has had thirteen field sea-sons from 1981 to 1996, and is currently in the third year ofan extended break for publications.

The history of Tel Miqne is reflected in the pattern of thesettlement development of the site, which produced occu-pation in the 10-acre upper city on the Northeast Acropolisand the 40-acre lower city. Both areas were settled by theSea Peoples/Philistines when they founded their large ur-ban center at Ekron in the first third of the twelfth centuryBCE. Following two hundred years of settlement, in the firstquarter of the tenth century, the city was destroyed, mostlikely as a result of an Egyptian military campaign. Fromthe tenth through the end of the eighth century, occupationwas concentrated in a small fortified town of ten acres in theupper city. At the very end of the eighth century, Ekron ex-panded, encompassing both the upper and lower cities, sothat in the seventh century, the city reached its greatest physi-cal extent of more than 75 acres. This reurbanization of Ekronwas the direct result of the impact of the pax Assyriaca, fol-lowing the military campaigns of Sargon II and Sennacheribwhen Ekron became a vassal city-state of the Neo-AssyrianEmpire. The Assyrian conquest of Ekron is documented inthe earliest extra-biblical reference to the city in the wall re-lief from Sargon II’s palace at Khorsabad in Assyria, whichdepicts his 712 BCE conquest of amqar[r]una, that is, Ekronof the Philistines.

In the new world economy of the Neo-Assyrian Empire,in which specialization and the concentration of industrywere fostered, Ekron became an industrial giant. The cottageindustry for the production of olive oil that had existed inthe eighth century in Judah disappeared when the Assyriansconquered and destroyed these cities. Thus, the eighthcentury Judean/Shephelah cities of Gezer, with 7 olive oilinstallations, Beth Shemesh, with 12, and Tell Beit Mirsim,

with 6, were replaced in the seventhcentury by the mass production of oliveoil at Ekron, with its more than 115 oliveoil installations. The effect of thistransformation can be seen in Ekron’snew well-conceived town plan of theseventh century with its four zones ofoccupation. The main feature of the citywas its industrial belt of olive oil factorybuildings extending around the innerface of the city wall, and the fortificationzone. These factory buildings aregenerally found just below the surfaceof the tel, sealed by a heavy destructionlayer dated to the 604 BCE campaign ofthe Neo-Babylonian King Nebuchad-nezzar. Each tri-partite factory building

Ekron of the Philistines in the Late Iron Age II

Seymour GitinDorot Director and Professor of Archaeology, AIAR

Fig. 3. Temple Complex 650; Field IV (revisedversion of plan published in Israel ExplorationJournal 47/1–2 [1997] 5).

12

had one room that contained an oliveoil installation, a second room for oilseparation, and a third room for textileproduction. The main components ofthe olive oil installation are a stone basinflanked by a press on each side and,opposite each press, four perforatedstone weights. Olives were firstcrushed in the basin with a stone roller,creating the purest or finest qualityolive oil. The olive mash or pulp wasthen put in straw baskets, stacked oneabove the other on top of a press. Awooden lever, secured in a niche andweighted with perforated stone weightsof about 90 kilos each, was then used topress the oil. Each of the dozens ofexcavated factory rooms held upwardsof 150 whole and restorable potteryvessels, 83.5% of which belonged to thePhilistine coastal ceramic tradition.This assemblage, together with the massive collection ofwhole forms from the 30 excavated rooms in elite zone,constitutes one of the largest ceramic corpora excavated inthe Levant. Each of these factory buildings also contained atleast one Judean-type four-horned incense altar, as well asother significant artifacts, such as the collection of ironagricultural tools.

The other major zone of occupation that best demonstratesthe effect of Assyrian hegemony over Philistia in the sev-enth century, as well as the antithetical attributes of continu-ity and acculturation of Philistine material culture, is theelite zone in the center of the city. The two main buildingsof this zone consisted of Temple Complex 650 (fig. 3) and itsadjacent auxiliary building. The latter produced most of theexamples of Assyrian-type bottles and goblets, as well ascultic items such as petal/leaf chalices and fine wares. It alsocontained four of the six caches of silver found at Ekron,including one cache stored in a vessel within a second ves-sel hidden under the floor of the building. When cleaned,this cache produced 89 pieces of hacksilber, that is, cut piecesof silver, rolled tongue ingots of silver, and one gold drop-let. Such silver caches found throughout the ancient NearEast, and dated to the seventh century, have been consid-ered currency or a form of money used to finance the com-mercial activities of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. In addition,the auxiliary building also contained a number of inscrip-tions that support the building’s association with the adja-cent Temple Complex, for example, a two part inscriptionon a large jar from one of the main store rooms of the build-ing, which reads qds l’srt, dedicated to the goddess Asherah.This is clearly a Canaanite or Phoenician goddess adoptedby the Ekronites. Another inscription on a store jar in theauxiliary building reads lmqm, for the shrine, and oppositeit are three parallel horizontal lines, above which is the tavsign. This may indicate the jar capacity of 30 units, possibly

of produce set aside for tithing. Thus, we know that notonly was there some decentralized cult practice at Ekron, asindicated by the widely distributed four-horned incense al-tars, but that also there was a centralized focus of cult prac-tice, namely a shrine. Another store jar inscription readssmn, meaning olive oil, indicating its contents, possibly usedin some cultic ceremony.

The main building in the elite zone, Temple Complex 650,was a monumental structure, 57 x 38 meters, and is one ofthe largest buildings of its kind ever excavated in Israel orJordan. Its architectural plan, which adheres to the designconcept of Neo-Assyrian royal palaces, temples and resi-dences, has three basic elements—a main courtyard with siderooms, and a cultic area with a pillared sanctuary separatedfrom the courtyard by a long, narrow reception hall. Thehall had at its southern end a raised mud brick platform orthrone with steps leading up to it.

The side rooms of the sanctuary produced a rich assem-blage of ceramic, metal and ivory objects, such as this storejar with the inscription lb‘l ulpdy, that is, for Baal, and forPadi. Padi is known from the Assyrian Annals as a king ofEkron. The formula of the inscription, known from Assyriandocuments, indicates a payment of cultic taxes, and under-scores the cultural influence exerted on Ekron by Assyrianimperial rule. Other objects from the side rooms include agold cobra, that is, a ureaus, which may have been part of adiadem of an Egyptian statue, the largest ivory head everfound in Israel, with an Egyptianizing, Phoenician style, anda carved ivory elephant tusk with the image of an Egyptianprincess or goddess, on the back of which was the cartou-che of the thirteenth century Pharaoh Mernephtah. Theseare just a few examples of an assemblage of curated culticobjects that represent the type of booty that the Assyriansmay have taken during one of their campaigns to Egypt.The two main features of the sanctuary are the central


Fig. 4. Royal dedicatory inscription from Ekron.

13

tion not only confirms the identification of the site, but alsoprovides the historical context for dating the sancutary andthe last great city of Ekron to the seventh century. Most im-portantly, it confirms what the excavated evidence alreadystrongly indicated, that is, the continuity of Philistine mate-rial culture throughout the Iron Age and the presence of Phi-listines at Ekron as late as the seventh century. This conclu-sion is supported by the seventh century Assyrian texts thatrefer to the land of the Philistines, and to the Philistine citiesthat are inhabited by Philistines. The latter reference, with itsethnic determinative, provides the strongest textual evidencefor the existence of the Philistines in the seventh century.

There is no doubt that the Babylonians destroyed Ekron,as shown by the Aramaic letter sent by Adon, probably thelast King of Ekron, to his patron the Egyptian Pharaoh, ask-ing to be saved from the impending attack by the Babylonianarmy. With the destruction of Ekron and the other Philistinecities, most likely in 604 BCE, and the deportation of the Phi-listines to Babylon, the history of the Philistines in Philistiawas also brought to an abrupt end.

pillared hall, which reflects the continuity of Aegean-stylearchitecture known from Iron Age I Ekron, as well as fromseventh century Kition, and the cella, or Holy of Holies. Thecella contained, in addition to offering bowls and a bronzescepter, a bell-shaped female figurine, perhaps representingthe goddess of the sanctuary, and, the most important arti-fact ever uncovered at Ekron—the Ekron Royal DedicatoryInscription, inscribed on a 100 km stone, measuring 60 x 39x 26 cm (fig. 4).

The inscription is composed of five lines and seventy-onecharacters, written in a script similar to Phoenician, and toOld Hebrew, and is perhaps, as Naveh has suggested, a can-didate for a local late Philistine script.

The inscription records the dedication of the Temple to thegoddess ptgyh, most likely of Aegean origin, by Achish, thatis Ikausu, understood as meaning the Greek, who was theson of Padi. Padi, Ikausu and their predecessors are referredto in the inscription as kings of Ekron. Padi and Ikausu arealso called kings of Ekron in the Annals of the Assyrian KingsSennacherib, Esharhaddon and Ashurbanipal. The inscrip-

The Social Implications of SubsistenceAnalysis of Faunal Remains from Tel Miqne-Ekron

Justin Lev-Tov, Research Fellow, AIARPh.D. Candidate, University of Tennessee

This study of the animal bones excavated in the North-east Acropolis of the Philistine capital city of Ekronlocated at Tel Miqne explores the role that pastoral

economy played in the region’s geopolitical history—through population migrations, expansion of empires, andthe ebb and flow of Ekron’s urban boundaries. The corequestion is, for what reasons did the Philistines’ diet changeor remain the same over time?

It is crucial to understand how and whether pastoral eco-nomic production changed as the city contracted and ex-panded over time. In the Late Bronze Age, Ekron was only a10-acre unfortified settlement on the Northeast Acropolis.By the early Iron Age, however, it had expanded to cover 50acres, including the 40 acres of the lower city, last occupiedduring the Middle Bronze Age. During the early part of theIron Age II period, Ekron’s city limits again contracted tothe 10 acres of the Northeast Acropolis. In the seventh cen-tury, the city grew phenomenally, expanding to cover an areaof 75 acres, including the entire lower city and the NortheastAcropolis. Presumably, in correlation with the changing sizeof the city, the economy alternately slowed and expanded,and this phenomenon should be visible in the bone data.

A topic to be explored while examining the relationshipbetween changing settlement plans and shifting patterns inthe faunal assemblage will be how the Philistines’ diet mightprovide clues pertaining to their origins and cultural iden-tity. The problem of Philistine ethnicity has been addressedpreviously in the literature in analyses of a variety of typesof material culture, including animal bones. Most research-

ers prefer an Aegean or possibly Cypriot origin for the Phi-listines; and some scholars maintain that pig bones are a cru-cial, and possibly even the only, reliable ethnic marker foridentifying Philistia’s cultural boundaries. The starting pointfor the pig discussion is that while swine were generally quiterare in the Near East during the Late Bronze Age, they werecommon in the contemporary Aegean world and at Iron AgePhilistine sites. Pork in the Aegean area was an importantsupplement to a diet where most of the meat, as in the NearEast, came from sheep and goats. Despite the regional di-etary divergence, there are two major deficiencies with thepig theory. One problem is with sampling—until now fewlarge-sized faunal assemblages have been studied and pub-lished from the major excavations of either Israelite or Phi-listine sites. This problem, in addition to the fact that in mostcases the pig question has been examined in isolation ratherthan in a pastoral context, leaves the case for a pork-basedPhilistine ethnic identity rather weak. Pork may well havebeen one of the staple meats and a typical feature of Philis-tine diet. Nevertheless, its importance should not be over-estimated and ham elevated to the status of a tribal totem.

One of the other goals of the project is to test and explorefurther Brian Hesse’s principal conclusions on the fauna fromTel Miqne (see BASOR 264 (1986) 17–27). Hesse authored apilot study on the fauna with a relatively small bone sample.The question is whether his findings hold true when re-ex-amined in the context of the much larger sample, which isthe basis for the current study. His three principal observa-tions are: 1) dairy and especially wool production became

14

Fig. 5. Variation in Diet over Time at Ekron.


more important in the Iron Age, 2) cattle and pigs becamemore common in the residents’ diets beginning in the IronAge I, and 3) there was a general trend over time, towardagricultural intensification, exemplified by the increase incattle and pigs.

The sample of animal bones used for this study is from theField I excavations on the Northeast Acropolis. This bonesample was selected principally because the NortheastAcropolis is the only part of the tel to have been inhabitedwithout interruption from the Middle Bronze Age throughto the seventh century BCE. Excavations in Field I were di-vided into an upper area, which produced the best evidencefor Late Bronze Age II and Iron Age II occupation, that is,monumental architecture and loci sealed by destruction de-bris and the lower area, consisting of a wide sondage on thetelís eastern slope which exposed Iron Age I fortifications,industrial, and cultic areas. From these deposits, a massiveassemblage of animal bones was recovered, from which wasselected a sample of about 28,000 bones and fragments origi-nating in a variety of fills, pits, debris, and surface loci. Ofthat sample, a total of approximately 25%, or almost 8,000bones, could be identified by species or other taxonomic level.

A quantitative summary of the assembled faunal evidencefrom Ekron, as shown in the accompanying histogram (fig.5), makes it clear that sheep and goats dominated the diet.These animals formed the mainstay of the population’s meatdiet, from the Late Bronze Age, Stratum VIII, through theIron Age I, Strata VII–IV, until the city’s end in the Iron AgeII, Strata III–I). Given that these animals typically dominatethe diet at most post-Neolithic sites in the Mediterraneanregion, their abundance was less than surprising. Other as-pects of the diet were, however, more thought-provoking.With the exception of tenth through early eighth century Stra-tum III-II, cattle were present in relatively equal numbersfrom the Late Bronze Age through the late Iron Age II pe-riod. This pattern contrasts with the trend Hesse identified,where cattle rose in importance with the start of the IronAge. On the other hand, the other half of Hesse’s proposal,that pork became a major food source beginning in the earlyIron Age, is supported by the new data. The pattern in theIron Age I strata is intriguing: pig bones rise from beingnearly absent in the Late Bronze Age to 15% of the identifiedbones in the early Iron Age I Stratum VII. Later in the IronAge I period, in Strata VI and V, pigs increase in importanceand in Stratum V reach a peak of 24%. This dramatic in-crease in pigs coincides with the arrival of the Philistines inCanaan. Settling in the southern coastal plain, the Philis-tines maintained some form of social and political continu-ity until the Neo-Babylonian destruction and subsequentdeportations at the end of the seventh century. Over time,however, their material culture became more similar to thatof neighboring states. This acculturation process is also ap-parent in the material remains of their meals. By the time ofthe Stratum IV city’s destruction at the end of Iron Age I,probably by Egypt, the residents of Ekron had become muchless interested in pig husbandry. Pig bones in Stratum IVcontexts are uncommon, that is, much less frequent than theyhad been in the preceding stratum. The trend away from

pig husbandry, which began in late Iron Age I, continuedthroughout the Iron Age II period.

The question then is why pigs disappeared from the Phi-listines’ meals in late Iron Age I and for the duration of IronAge II? The answer may have something to do with theprocess of acculturation, but other factors related to pig hus-bandry could alternatively be responsible for the animal’searly importance and later decline. Many pig theories havebeen advanced in archaeology over the years, most often con-cerning reasons for pig prohibitions. At first glance, a lesscommon theory, in which pigs are popular early on in asettlementís history and decline at some point thereafter, fitsthis case better. The idea is that pigs are a useful dietarysource for new immigrant populations, because they easilyadapt to a variety of environmental conditions, have largelitters, and mature quickly. Since the Philistines were newarrivals to Canaan in the first third of the twelfth centuryBCE, it seems that this theory may fit the case well. Or doesit? The pig’s popularity with the Philistines lasted for nearlythe entire Iron Age I period, and that is the crippling prob-lem with the adaptation hypothesis in this case. Two hun-dred years or so seems like a very long period of culturaland environmental adjustment, especially if the Philistinesdid come from the similar climate of the Aegean region.

A better explanation considers how pig husbandry fits intoregional systems of intensified agricultural production. Pigsare easily raised on small houselots and on a private ratherthan a state basis, reducing dependence on elite-controlledmarkets. But intensified agriculture brings with it pressureto increase production of valuable market commodities likegrain and wool. This necessitates that more land be devotedto cash crops and pasturage. In an era of intensified agricul-ture, it is a logical economic decision for elites to discourage,or entrepreneurs to voluntarily abandon, large-scale hoghusbandry. Pork is mainly a domestically raised and con-sumed product rather than a market commodity and there-fore less valuable in this context. Pig husbandry may de-cline in situations where far-flung cities and towns becomeintegrated into regional economic and political networks.

There is evidence from the faunal assemblage of Ekrondemonstrating a shift over time to a more intensive agricul-tural practice. Veterinary research has demonstrated that

15

“schlepping” activities such as pulling heavily loaded cartsor plowing causes osteoarthritis to develop in the foot bonesof draft animals like cattle (fig. 6). The degree to which cattlefoot bones exhibit osteoarthritis can be quantified and con-verted into a “pathological index” value, and then plottedover time to see temporal trends. Presumably, more diseasedbones or more bones showing greater disease progressionindicate something about the intensity of cultivation. A trendtoward increasingly severe and common degenerative dis-ease over time was observed in the large sample of cattletoes, over 200, available from the faunal assemblage. Thereis a statistically significant jump (P < .01) in the averagepathological index scores between both the Late Bronze (m =3.20) and Iron I (m = 3.84), and between the Iron I and Iron II(m = 4.04).

The Iron Age faunal material from Ekron also displays evi-dence of increased market orientation in sheep and goatproduction, rather than one directed toward household sub-sistence. Market-oriented sheep and goat herding can bedetected by examining mortality patterns –the ages to whichflock animals are allowed to live before slaughtering. Theidea is that there are near-universal rules governing when asheep or goat is killed, depending upon whether one is in-terested solely in meat, milk, wool, or some combination ofthese. When a community is interested in “secondary prod-ucts” like wool and milk, it is necessary to keep a large per-centage of the herd alive until the animals are several yearsold. A city economy specializing in wool or dairy produc-tion would, therefore, tend to keep alive longer a larger num-ber of its sheep and goats. The mortality patterns for theLate Bronze Age, Iron Age I, and Iron Age II periods showthat, over time, there was a steady increase in the propor-tion of the flocks kept alive until they reached three to fouryears, indicating an increasing interest in secondary prod-ucts.

A final piece of evidence in the agricultural intensificationpuzzle is the ratio of sheep to goats. In all strata dating be-fore the Iron Age II, the ratio of sheep to goats is approxi-mately 1:1. But in Stratum III-II, this ratio changes dramati-cally, and sheep outnumber goats by a ratio of 2:1. This trend

continued into the final period of the city, when Ekron wasunder the hegemony of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. In Stra-tum I, sheep further outnumber goats, at this point by a ra-tio of 3:1. The shift to having more extensive sheep thangoat flocks may have been a product of the Assyrians’ inter-est in commerce—wool was likely a valuable product withwhich Ekron could supply the empire. The existence of atextile industry is supported by the large number ofloomweights discovered in the excavations, mainly in theolive oil industrial area of the seventh century Stratum I city.Textiles were most likely chosen as a marketable productwhose manufacture did not interfere and even harmonizedwith olive oil production, since sheep are sheared in thespring and olives harvested in the late fall.

Thus, the faunal evidence suggests much more than thatthe ancient inhabitants of Ekron ate beef, mutton, lamb, andsome pork—all of which might have been assumed withoutever having looked at a single bone. The implications of thislarge assemblage of kitchen waste reflect a number of socialprocesses. The Philistines’ early interest in pig husbandryseems to be one facet of their cultural identity, a predilectionperhaps brought with them from the Aegean. The later de-cline in pig raising at Ekron may well reflect an accultura-tion process, perhaps triggered by outside political and eco-nomic forces. This new geopolitical reality integrated thecity into not only the grind of tax and tribute but also theopportunity to profit from supplying distant markets withvaluable commodities.

At this early stage in the data analysis, the above conclu-sions can only be considered preliminary. Nonetheless, it isencouraging that the results reported here mesh so well withanalyses of other types of material culture from the site. Whatemerges is the support for an analytical approach that goesbeyond pigs and people and instead integrates pig bonesinto the overall archaeological context.

Fig. 6. Cattle toes from Ekron showing varying degrees of osteoar-thritic development (left to right: a healthy toe; a moderately dis-eased toe; and a severely diseased toe)

New PublicationsThe Chalcolithic Culture of the Golanby Claire Epstein(IAA Reports 4)US$68.00 Cloth 352 pages + foldout plans

A comprehensive volume dealing with more than a decadeof work on the Chalcolithic culture of the Golan Heights.

To order, contact The Israel Antiquities Authority, PO Box586, 91004 Jerusalem, Israel. [email protected]

Daily Life in Ancient Mesopotamiaby Karen Nemet-Nejat(Daily Life Through History Series)US$45.00 0-313-29497-6 368 pages

“An introduction … to the world of ancient Mesopotamia. Itoffers an unusually comprehensive survey of the range ofMesopotamian culture, society, and everyday activites”

To order, contact The Greenwood Publishing Group, 88 PostRoad West, PO Box 5007, Westport, CT 06881-5007. Tel.203-226-3571. www.greenwood.com

16


Landscape Archaeology and Salvage Excavations in Modi‘in

Shimon Gibson, Post-Doctoral Fellow, AIARIsrael Antiquities Authority

Landscape Archaeology is a methodology that dealswith the study of the development of the morphol-ogy of a given landscape through time. Unlike con-

ventional archaeological methods, landscape archaeologymarks a shift away from the primary focus on ancient settle-ments and concentrates on the patterning of so-called “off-site” archaeological features with each element of ancienthuman behavior within a landscape being sampled. Thismethod is particularly useful for the study of land-use pat-terns and forms of economic activity.

Since 1995 a project of landscape archaeology has beenconducted in the hills of Modi’in by Shimon Gibson and EgonLass on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority. Modi’in islocated in the northern Shephelah, in the western foothillsof Israel, not too far away from the market town of Lod(Lydda). The Modi’in project was initiated following theimmediate need for a series of salvage excavations withinthe area of the new city of Modi’in which was then underconstruction. Historically, Modi’in was the hometown of theMaccabees who rebelled against the Seleucids in the mid-second century BCE. The present author believes that the an-cient town of Modi’in should be identified at Khirbet el-Burj(Titura) and not at the traditional site of Khirbet el-Midyewhich is essentially a Byzantine settlement and cemetery.

The Modi’in region is dominated by low hills with an un-dulating and rugged appearance, with enormous expansesof rocky outcrops, great quantities of loose stones and smallpockets of terra rossa soil. Since 1995 a couple of thousandarchaeological features have been recorded and of these aselection was chosen for excavation. The choice of the areassampled was not determined on scientific grounds but wasmade by the Ministry of Housing and Construction and in-dividual contractors. These salvage excavations are still inprogress as the modern city continues to expand. The ar-chaeological remains of the ancient human activities wereall designated “features” and numbered accordingly. The fol-lowing classes of features were encountered in the surveyand excavations: farm buildings, towers, cisterns, sherd scat-ters, PPNA flint scatters, roads, terraces, stone boundaries,stone clearance heaps, threshing floors, caves, tombs, winepresses, cupmarks, stone quarries, lime kilns, and charcoalburners. These features are located in units of land belong-ing to one of the main ancient settlements in the region,namely Khirbet el-Burj (Titura), Bir Ma’in (Re’ut) andBerfilya.

Excluding the farmhouses, which have an abundance ofpottery and other artefacts, the material culture from the fea-tures was generally sparse with no more than a handful ofpotsherds unearthed per feature. The pottery from the sur-veys and excavations may be attributed to five main chro-nological groups: (1) Chalcolithic to Middle Bronze Age II(2) Iron Age II; (3) Late Hellenistic to Roman; (4) Byzantineto Early Islamic; and (5) Medieval to Ottoman. The fabrics

of the five pottery groups were sufficiently distinctive to al-low us to date abraded body sherds even when componentssuch as rims, handles or bases were not available. The rangeof pottery types used by the ancient peoples working in thislandscape was limited—mainly storage jars and cookingpots—and this fact also helped with the pottery-reading pro-cedures. A pottery typology was eventually created basedon the material obtained from the various excavations.

Methods of excavation varied from one feature to another.In dealing with a stone clearance heap, for example, it wasessential to distinguish between initial stone clearance ac-tivities resulting from field or terrace construction proceduresand activities resulting from field or terrace ploughing proce-dures. The dating evidence available from a specific featurecould then be interlinked with the patterning of other dat-ing materials derived from clusters of features across theentire landscape. There seemed to be no point in excavatingfeatures as simple dots in the landscape unless there was anintention to investigate the overall context of such features.

The excavation of farm buildings helped provide more de-tailed information regarding ceramic sequences that couldthen be used to date nearby features in which only very fewdating materials had been preserved. There was a great dif-ficulty in dating rock-cut wine presses and cupmarks, andmany of them were visibly exposed without much soil withinthem. They were dated generally to the Late Hellenistic toByzantine periods on morphological grounds as well as onthe assumption that the sherd scatters found in their imme-diate proximity date from the time when they were in use.With lime kilns and charcoal burners it became evident thatthey could not be dated properly without radiocarbon datesbeing made of the charcoal deposits on their floors.

The best soils in the Modi’in area existed in the shallowbut narrow wadis and in flat catchment areas of soil. Theslopes of hills were largely rocky without much soil on them.Some of the pockets of soil were so small that it seemedhardly likely that they would have been utilized for cultiva-tion purposes. However, excavations actually showed thatthese pockets were indeed used for agriculture and not justfor hoe cultivation. Plough-marks were very clearly evidenton the surfaces of the underlying rock beneath the pocketsof soil and on the edges of boulders adjoining the plots.

The region was criss-crossed by a number of ancient high-ways and regional roads linking the principal settlementswith the market towns of the northern Shephelah. The Ro-man highways have “bends” or “shoulders” at regular in-tervals of about one kilometer and these were characteristicof roads from this period in the Near East (as was shown bythe late Derek Riley). The regional roads were adapted tothe topography and the layout of field systems. They gaveancient farmers ease of access to the fields from their placesof abode.

17

corded in the Modi’in area. These ranged in size between afew meters to as many as eight meters in diameter. They wereusually surrounded by ring walls built of boulders, exceptfor the very small examples. The fact that these piles weresometimes in use over long periods of time has made it pos-sible to study their internal stratigraphy.

The excavations conducted in the Modi’in region indicatetwo main periods of extensive agricultural exploitation inthe landscape, the first from the Late Hellenistic-Early Ro-man period (late second century BCE to the first century CE)and the second from the Byzantine–Early Islamic period(sixth to ninth centuries CE). Not surprisingly, the only twofarmsteads excavated in the region also belong to these twomain periods. In the periods preceding the Hellenistic pe-riod, agriculture was much more intensive and was concen-trated in the valley beds. In the Medieval to Ottoman peri-ods, the region was almost exclusively utilized for indus-trial purposes with the establishment of hundreds of limekilns and charcoal burners across the landscape.

A great deal of effort had been expended in antiquity onthe layout of field systems in the area, with plots of landsurrounded by stone boundary walls and with terraces onthe slopes. Sample of terraces, wadi dam walls and fieldboundary walls were excavated. The construction techniquesof these terraces and dams resemble those investigated inother highland environments, especially in regard to the useof stony drainage fills behind external retaining walls. Theboundary walls of fields and terrace walls were originallybuilt with a general north to south axis and this was evidentin many areas of the Modi’in landscape. This co-axial ar-rangement indicates that field systems were pre-planned andwere not just the result of the general development of fieldsadapting to the existing topography and environmental con-ditions. The earliest field systems in the Modi’in region maybe dated to the Hellenistic period. A massive stone clear-ance operation must have been undertaken in the area im-mediately before the construction of the fields took place. Itis not surprising therefore that many thousands of stoneclearance piles (known in Arabic as rujum) have been re-

Sacra MetallurgicaMetallurgy and Cult in Greece and the Near East

Sandra Blakely, NEH Fellow, AIARDepartment of Classics, Emory University

character specifically celebrated through the cultic produc-tion of metals, careful analysis of a group of daimones, mi-nor gods in the Greek mythological corpus, show a mythicdiscussion of the advent, control and dissemination of met-allurgy that offers important parallels to the kinds of mes-sages carried in the combination of religion and productionseen in sanctuaries in Cyprus and the Levant. This leaves uswith a more subtle model for the relationship between myth,as a cultural artifact, and the archaeological record; it alsojustifies studies between East and West that incorporate bothtextual and archaeological material.

Archaeological sites showing cult and metal productionfall into three cultural categories. Cypriot sites, with a strongAegean influence, include Athienou, Kition, Enkomi,Kalopsidha and Tamassos; Serabit el Khadem and Timna areculturally, if not geographically, Egyptian; Semitic sites in-clude Middle Bronze Nahariya and Tell Hayyat, Late BronzeMegiddo, Ras Ibn Hani, Tel Nami and Kamid el Loz, andDan and Taanach from the Iron Age. Factors included in thecomparative analysis fell into three broad categories: envi-ronment and economy, the type of metallurgical processesand artifacts found, and religion, including physical layoutof sanctuaries, votives and cult equipment, and the identityand iconography of the divinities worshiped.

The analysis of these sites demonstrates the inadvisabilityof assuming any shared religious ideology behind the com-bination of metallurgy and cult. In no case was the godworshiped one whose myths or iconography associated themwith metal production. The same divinity was not worshipedat these locations, nor was their any international koine in

Metals were produced in a number of cult sites inLate Bronze and Iron Age Greece, Cyprus, and theLevant. The juxtaposition has been the subject of

some discussion. Since it is relatively rare, archaeologistswho publish examples from Greece, Crete and the islandsoften compare them to sites in Cyprus, the Negev and theLevantine coast. By doing so, these scholars make the tacitassumption that Greek and Eastern sites are essentially com-parable, so that the combination of metallurgy and culticactivities at Kition on Cyprus could cast light on the samecombination at Olympia or Delphi. They frequently argue,further, that the divinities of the shrines hosting metal pro-duction may logically be expected to represent a metallurgi-cal divinity, Hephaistos or one of his Near Eastern counter-parts.

Comparative analysis of the sites shows that these assump-tions are problematic. Because there are as many distinc-tions as similarities between them, we err to leap too quicklyfrom a familiar mythic figure to a relatively unusual culticphenomenon. Closer study can, however, help to developmore fruitful questions about the significance of this juxta-position. Metallurgy in cult sites combines dangerous pro-cesses with symbolic and ritual contexts in which men com-municated to the gods and their peers important messagesabout the structure of the community, the status of its mem-bers and the activities in which it was engaged. Metallurgyitself tends to draw a crowd, as it combines heat, art, dangerand transformation; it may, therefore, logically be expectedto contribute in significant ways to the communicative forceof its ritual setting. And while there is not a mythological

18

Papers Presented at the Albright Appointees’ Colloquium at ACOR in Amman, Jordan

offerings, iconography, and cult paraphernalia. More subtlepatterns do, however, emerge. Metallurgy may be broughtinto contact with the god through several distinct ways: siteconfiguration, iconography, or votives. Metal may be pro-duced in a sacred area, as at Kition, where workshops in-cluding furnaces, crucibles, and copper slag were in directcommunication with the temple from the thirteenth centurythrough the Phoenician levels. Timna, Tel Nami, Tell Hayyet,Nahariya and Taanach follow a similar pattern. Other sitesoffer the reverse pattern, the introduction of a sacred areainto a primarily industrial context. Examples include Kamidel Loz, where evidence of offerings and sacrifices are foundin workshops, and Dan. Iconography is used to bring thedivine into the metallurgical process at Enkomi, where a figu-rine of the widely familiar smiting god type was mountedon an ingot; Timna shows an analogous approach in theworship of Hathor as Lady of Malachite. Votives, in the formof metal scrap, copper nodules, and drips, runoff and spills,suggest a third way to invoke the god in connection withmetallurgical processes. More fully manufactured votivesmay be put to this use as well. Thus miniature ingots werededicated to the god at Enkomi, and votive tools have beenfound at Kalopsidha, Athienou and Timna.

This range of architectural, iconographic and votive meansfor associating metallurgy with the divine suggests at leastthree distinct functions. The mold for a female figurine foundat Nahariya, and evidence of votive production at Timna,would seem to indicate that materials were manufacturedon-site for dedication to the god worshiped there. Architec-tural and iconographic material from Kition and Enkomi,on the other hand, seem to reflect the employment of sacredsymbols by the elite to enable their control over the metalindustry. The dedication of scrap materials, waste and vo-tive tools, seen at Athienou, Timna, Dan and Kamid el Loz,may point to a third and very different model. As these areeconomically insignificant materials, they would be avail-able to the lowest economic stratum, such as the workersthemselves. They may therefore represent an appeal to thegod for protection in the dangerous tasks involved in metalproduction. More than one of these religious expressions,moreover, may coexist in a single site. Thus Timna showsboth on-site votive production and the dedication of scrap.

Greek evidence of an association of metallurgy and cultmay be found in both the Late Bronze and Iron Ages. In theLate Bronze we have evidence from palaces, sanctuaries andLinear B tablets; all three are less convincing than the East-ern archaeological material. The palaces show metallurgyin the general area of the shrines, but not emphatically in-cluded. Thus, the shrine at Malia is argued to have beenlocated on the floor above the workshop, and bronze oxhideingots at Zakros were in the west wing, which was predomi-nantly but not exclusively religious in function. Finds fromsanctuaries at Agios Georgios, Syme, Phylakopi, Ayia Iriniand Troullos include lumps of bronze, slag, crucible frag-ments and bronzes. They are often found with other votives,and are not accompanied by any signs of kilning or slag.They seem, therefore, votives from metallurgists much morethan signs of on-site production. Caves offer similar indica-

tions—Psychro, Ida, Arkalochori and Kamares yielded tools,bronze lumps, and votives, ingots, half-finished swords andabundant metal votives. The Pylos tablets have been invokedto argue for a special association of the smiths with Potnia,high status for bronzeworkers, or the collection of part ofthe smith’s production for the palaces. They do not, how-ever, seem to specify production of metals at cult sites.

Iron Age Greek cult sites offer far more evidence of actualproduction inside the boundaries of the temenoi. Amongthese are a smithy at the shrine of Apollo at Eretrie, slag atBassae, molds and slag at the sanctuaries of Artemis andApollo at Kalapodi. Other important sites include AthenaAlea at Tegea, Athena Itonia at Philia, the Panhellenic sanc-tuary at Olympia, the Heraion on Samos, Delphi, and Delos.Items manufactured were often votive, but pragmatic mate-rials, such as door hinges and fibulae, appear as well. TheseGreek examples differ from their Near Eastern counterpartsin economy, religion, and social context. The sanctuaries arenot particular to areas with a strong dependence on metalsin their economies, nor is there evidence of successful elitecontrol over the industry in either the Late Bronze or IronAges. The divinities do not bear any metallic iconography.We have no Artemis on an ingot or Apollo of the copper.Nor do we see, in the Iron Age, characteristic offerings ofslag, spills or casting runoff as votives. We see, that is, noconsistent effort to weave the processes of metallurgy intothe religious vocabulary. Casting facilities in sacred precinctsmust then seem merely economic and convenient, and theyhave accordingly been interpreted as the recycling of olddedications, or the logical connection of the metallurgist withhis market.

Archaeological evidence from Greece, Crete and the islandsthus does not seem to support any substantial ideologicalassociation between metal processing and the divine. Themythic corpus, however, may. A group of daimones, knownas Daktyloi, Telchines, Kabeiroi, Kouretes and Korybantesappears over 2000 years of fragmentary attestation. Asdaimones, they belong to a mythological strata character-ized as wild, archaic and untameable. Their names—Damnameneus, Akmon, Skelmis—refer to the processes ofthe forge, and they function as a cultural discussion of metalproduction.Their myths including stories of how they in-vented iron, cast bronze, and migrated along metallurgicaltrade routes from Cyprus, to Rhodes, to Crete. The inven-tion of invidious, uncontrollable foreign daimones for thispurpose contrasts in the strongest way with the “metalliza-tion” of familiar divinities, seen in Cyprus and Timna as ve-hicles of elite industry control. They articulate the antipa-thy of the metallurgist to social order, evoking a strategy ofexclusion that is as effective a means of management as in-corporation.

There are significant parallels, however, between the struc-ture of these Greek myths and the semiotics of metallurgy inNear Eastern cult sites. The first is the evidence for two kindsof religious sensibilites, one serving the managerial ambi-tions of an elite, the other the magical and apotropaic sensi-bilities of the workers themselves. Structural analysis of thefive daimonic types reveals an intriguing correspondence

19

between the association with metallurgy and the relation-ship to established powers. The two daimones—Daktyloiand Telchines—that are the most clearly metallurgical arealso the most magical, resistant to divine protocol, prone tophysical deformation, and destructive. The two daimonesmost thinly linked to the forge, the Kouretes and Korybantes,articulate in contrast enthusiastic support of kings, youngmen in military training, and physical beauty. They protectthe infant Zeus from his father’s appetite, instruct youths inwar dances, and accompany Cretan colonists to Spain. Thisdivision in the mythic type of magical, secretive powers onthe one hand, and normative public rituals on the other ech-oes the model of two religious types in the Near Eastern evi-dence.

A second point addresses this issue of the metallurgist asmagician. Ideas as well as artifacts travelled along the trad-ing routes between East and West, and the religious sensi-bilities of the workers would be a natural inclusion in theinvisible cargo of cultural ideas. Such metallurgists, how-ever, operated in the early Iron Age as free agents rather thanthe servants of palace systems. It seems very unlikely thatthey would have brought with them the religious ideas thatarticulated the goals of an elite. Magical performances andapotropaic protection, however, would continue to be a con-cern for workers involved in a highly dangerous and uncer-

tain craft such as metallurgy, and could well be expected totravel with them. The strong association between the mostmetallurgical of the daimones and the Greek terms for ma-gician may reflect this transmission of magical sensibilitiesalong with the metals trade.

There is, finally, a significant difference between the mythicsmiths and their real-life counterparts, who were itinerantcrafting specialists entering Greece from the Near East. Theydo not represent the most widespread or familiar type ofmetals production for either the Late Bronze or the Iron Age.Particularly in the Iron Age, it is clear that part-time and non-specialized production of metal was widely practiced. Thefocus, therefore, on an unusual and atypical figure for themythological discussion of metallurgy suggests the employ-ment of a model of smithing that emphasized andpermanized his status as outsider, liminal, and dangerous—a figure to be controlled not by inclusion, but exclusion fromthe ranks of ordinary society. The need to do so reflects thepower of metallurgy as a social force, economically potentand hence semiotically rich. Its inclusion in the religiousvocabulary is, therefore, less a puzzle than an index of theneed and potential for religion to not only reflect, but ac-tively discuss such socially critical issues as technology, pro-duction, and change.

The Islamic Holy Places of 19th Century Jerusalem

Robert SchickIslamic Studies Fellow, AIAR

This paper deals with the questions what Muslims inthe Ottoman period considered a holy place to be andwhich places a Muslim pilgrim to Jerusalem would

have visited. My presentation combines information fromtwo related research projects on which I have been workingfor the past year. These projects involved working on theexhibits in the Islamic Museum on the Haram al-Sharif inJerusalem, and on a corpus of the Islamic sites and monu-ments in Jerusalem.

The Islamic Museum has a number of stamps on displayfrom the Ottoman period, probably of the nineteenth cen-tury. Two stamps depict the Dome of the Rock and the othersecondary shrines on the upper Dome of the Rock platform,and a third stamp depicts the al-Aqsa Mosque. Anotherstamp, the most informative one in the Islamic Museum,contains a list written in Ottoman Turkish of some 80 Islamicholy places in Jerusalem, Hebron, and the adjacent regionthat a Muslim pilgrim should visit. The list, which is arrangedhaphazardly on the stamp, begins with the shrines on theHaram al-Sharif in Jerusalem, continues with the shrine inHebron and vicinity, and concludes with a list of tombs ofholy men in Jerusalem. The latest shaykh on the list died in1805, indicating that the stamp was made after that date.

The introduction to the text on the stamp states that theobjective of the stamp is to list the holy places, shrines andtombs of the prophets and holy men in Jerusalem and

Hebron. The list begins with sites on the north side of theHaram and the secondary shrines on the upper Dome of theRock platform, such as the Dome of Khadir at the northwestcorner. Next comes a variety of places within the Dome ofthe Rock itself, such as the mihrab and footprint of Idris, thefootprint of the Prophet, the mihrab of Sulayman, the shrineof Khadir, the shrine of Jibril, and the mihrab of David. Theseare followed by additional shrines on the upper Dome ofthe Rock platform, such as the Dome of the Spirits, the uni-dentified Mihrab of al-Imam al-A‘zam Darwish, and the LawCourt of David (Dome of the Chain).

The list continues with the Masjid al-Aqsa on the southend of the Haram, and mentions a number of places inside,such as the mihrab of Mu‘awiyah, the mihrab of the ImamShafa‘i, the mosque of ‘Umar, the mihrab of Zakariya andYahya, and the grave of the sons of Aaron in the Double Gatepassage beneath the al-Aqsa Mosque. Next is the GoldenGate and then the grave of the descendants of ShaykhShaddad, one of the Companions of the Prophet, who is bur-ied not far from the Golden Gate. The list then jumps to thegrave of Abu ‘Ubaydah, the commander of the Muslimarmies in the 630s, buried in the Jordan Valley, and then re-turns to Jerusalem citing the grave of Shaykh Hasan, wholived in the late eleventh–early twelfth century, and whoseextant shrine is north of the Haram; the Tomb of the VirginMary in Gethsemane; and the tomb of Shaykh Muhammad

20

Ghabain, a little-known figure of the Mamluk period, bur-ied along David Street in the Old City; Shaykh ‘Ala al-DinAydughdi al-Busayri, the supervisor of the Haram, who diedin 1294 and was buried next to his hospice just west of theHaram; Shaykh Muhammad al-Khalili, the most prominentIslamic figure in Jerusalem in the early eighteenth century,who died in 1735, and was buried along the western perim-eter of the Haram; Shaykh Muhammad al-Budayri, a promi-nent sufi who died in 1805 and was buried on the westernperimeter of the Haram. The seal concludes with a summaryof the sites listed.

The stamp does not list every place of Islamic interest, suchas the tomb of Shaykh Badr, where the Givat Ram campusof Hebrew University is located, or the tomb on the Mountof Olives of Rabi‘ah al-‘Adawiyah, a pioneering mystic fromthe early Islamic period,or Nabi Samwil, north ofJerusalem. But it is note-worthy that every site onthe list outside of theHaram in Jerusalem con-tains a tomb. That revealsthe clear interest of the listin the sufi mystic practiceof visiting the graves of Is-lamic holy figures. The listis not intended for seculartourists; many Islamicmonuments in Jerusalemof major architectural in-terest are not included.

While most of the siteson the list are readily iden-tifiable with extantshrines, the list contains afew that are unidentifiableand a substantial numberof sites that have been ne-glected if not totally for-gotten in the twentiethcentury. This demon-strates a major shift in thetwentieth century to a lessmystical notion of what arethe interesting Islamicmonuments in Jerusalem.In the secular twentieth century, tourism has grown along-side pilgrimage, and from the start of the British Mandateperiod, the various guide books that the Supreme IslamicCouncil has produced have included lists of the numerousmonuments of historical and architectural interest built inthe Mamluk and Ottoman periods that the tomb-orientednineteenth-century stamp had ignored.

Fig. 8. Nineteenth century stamp list-ing the Islamic holy places in Jerusa-lem, Hebron and vicinity.


al-‘Alami, who died in 1628 and was buried on the Mount ofOlives.

The tomb of Sulayman Bek is also listed. Bek is a term usedin the Ottoman period for a secular government official, soSulayman was not a religious figure. It is not certain whichSulayman is meant, although there were several Ottomangovernors of Jerusalem named Sulayman.

Also on the list are the tomb of David on Mount Zion,Rachel’s Tomb north of Bethlehem, and other tombs of OldTestament Prophets in the cities south of Jerusalem, such asthe Prophet Matta, the father of Jonah in Bayt Ummar be-tween Bethlehem and Hebron, and the Prophet Yunus inHalhoul, north of Hebron. Then a number of places in Hebronitself appear, notably the Tombs of the Patriarchs, and thenthe tomb of the Prophet Lot in Bani Nu‘aym, east of Hebron.

The list then returns to Jerusalem with tombs of Islamicreligious figures from the Ayyubid, Mamluk and Ottomanperiods. They are: Shaykh al-Thawri from the Ayyubid pe-riod, for whom the Abu Tor neighborhood in the south ofJerusalem is named; Shaykh Ahmad al-Dajjani, who was incharge of the endowments for the Tomb of David on MountZion and who died in 1562 and was buried in the Mamillacemetery; Shaykh Jarrah, one of Salah al-Din’s army com-manders, who died in 1201 and was buried to the north ofthe Old City; Shaykh Lu’lu’, buried just inside DamascusGate in his zawiyah that he founded in 1373; al-Sayyid ‘AbdAllah al-Qarashi, a prominent mystic of the Mamluk periodburied in the Mamilla cemetery; Abu Yazid al-Bistami, aprominent sufi mystic who died in 1360 and was buried inthe Mamilla cemetery; Abu Madyan al-Ghawth, a prominentSufi mystic in the early 14th century, buried in the NorthAfrican Quarter, where the Western Wall plaza now is lo-cated; Shaykh Muhammad al-Qirami, a prominent sufi mys-tic, who died in 1386 and is buried in the center of the OldCity; Shaykh Muhammad al-Muthabbit, the grandson ofShaykh al-Qirami who died in 1410 and was buried a fewmeters northwest of Muhammad al-Qirami; Shaykh

Fig. 7. Nineteenthcentury stampdepicting theshrines on theupper Dome ofthe Rock plat-form.

21

Photocopy and mail this form with your payment to:ASORSuite 330825 Houston Mill RoadAtlanta, GA 30329

Send me: QuantityColor Medium Large XLarge Subtotals

MediterraneanSky Blue ____ ____ ____ _____

Desert Sand ____ ____ ____ _____

Shipping ($2.50 per shirt) _____

Total _____

Enclosing check or money order drawn on a U.S. bank

Charge my: MasterCard VISA

Card # ________________________________________

Card Expiration Date _____________________________

Signature ______________________________________

Name _________________________________________

Address _______________________________________

______________________________________________

City/State/Zip ___________________________________

22

1999

23

Scholarships for the Summer Workshop onthe Origins of the Alphabet

The Center for Mediterranean Civilizations, Lester and Sally Entin Faculty of Humanities, Tel Aviv University, Israel announces aworkshop on THE ORIGINS OF THE ALPHABET on 11th–22nd July 1999. The workshop will concentrate on the following:

(a) The ‘invention’ of the alphabet and the epigraphic situation in the eastern Mediterranean at the close of the second millennium BCE.and the beginning of the first.

(b) The problem of the transmission of the West Semitic script to ancient Greece.While naturally concentrating on Semitic and Greek alphabetic writing, the programme of the workshop will also include introductory

lectures on cuneiform writing, Egyptian hieroglyphs, Hieroglyphic Luwian, and Aegean scripts. Excursions to archaeological sites ofrelated interest are also planned.

The workshop should be of interest to graduate students and postdoctorate fellows in Aegean and Near Eastern archaeology, Classics,Ancient and Near Eastern history, and related disciplines.

Accommodation: single rooms are available in apartments with shared bathroom and cooking facilities (420$ for a minimum of twelvedays; this can be extended at the cost of 35$ per day). Lunch is available at the University at a cost of 65$ for the duration of the workshop.

Ten scholarships (1000 US$ each) are available for overseas participants. Kindly send CV and one letter of recommendation.Registration fee: 200$. For further information and plan please contact Professor Margalit Finkelberg E-mail: [email protected].

Department of Classics, Faculty of Humanities, Tel Aviv University, P.O.B. 39040, Ramat Aviv, 69978 Tel Aviv, Israel.

NEWSandNOTICES

Tell Qarqur Expedition looking forVolunteers from the Boston Area

Interested in volunteering to help in the ASOR Boston office andin a lab at the Department of Archaeology at Boston University toenter field records into computer files, describe and draw potterysherds, copy and organize field drawings and top plans, sort car-bonized seeds? Skills needed: accuracy in transcribing records, ex-perience in working with architectural drawings and reconstruc-tions, patience, patience and more patience. There is never enoughfunding to get all the jobs done that are needed to prepare exca-vated archaeological materials for publication. Volunteers love theirfield experiences on different digs but seldom get a chance to helpwith all the other stages that are required to process the materialsafter the dig. We are thinking of organizing a volunteer programthis fall. If you would like to help and have some time you cangive us, please give us a call at the Boston office (617-353-6570) orsend us a note and we’ll see what we can work out!

Sarah Bean was doing ethnographic field work with theBedouin of Petra when she contracted meningitus. She diedin Amman from the disease. She loved Jordan and workingwith the Bedouin. She was scheduled to be a presenter at theASOR central states meetings.

Peter Warnock

UC Berkeley - Santa BarbaraTel Dor Archaeological Expedition

This summer, during July and early August, a joint team fromUC Berkeley and UC Santa Barbara will resume excavations in thetemple and citadel areas. The team will be led by Professor An-drew Stewart of UC Berkeley and co-directed by Professor RainerMack of U.C. Santa Barbara. This is part of an international effort,led by Professor Ephraim Stern of the Hebrew University of Jerusa-lem, to uncover one of the richest sites in coastal Israel. KingSolomon’s principal harbor and a major Phoenician, Jewish, Per-sian, Greek, and Roman city, Tel Dor offers a unique opportunityfor volunteers to learn the techniques of modern field archaeologyfrom experienced excavators. No previous archaeological trainingor affiliation with the University of California are necessary; appli-cants must be over 18 years of age.

Go to qal.berkeley.edu/~teldor Click for more information andthe Application to join the thirteenth U.C. Tel Dor Expedition. Fur-ther information may also be obtained from Professor Stewart at:UC Tel Dor Archaeological Expedition, Department of History ofArt, U.C. Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720-6020, tel: (510) 642-4524 /fax: (510) 643-2185. [email protected]

Dr. Melvin K. Lyons

After a prolonged and debilitating illness, Melvin Lyons diedduring the first week of March 1999. He was one of the mostfaithful and supportive trustees of both AIAR and ASOR, whonever missed an Annual Meeting. He also served as ASOR’smedical director from 1968, when he was invited by Bill Deverto join the Gezer staff as its physician.

With the introduction of volunteers on excavations, it wasimperative that medical standards be established and enforced.This was the achievement of Mel Lyons, who reviewed themedical forms of ASOR volunteers before every dig season.As a consequence, remarkably few volunteers suffered fromillnesses that kept them out of the field for an extended pe-riod.

The directives and standards that Mel formulated were pub-lished by ASOR in a book entitled The Care and Feeding of DirtArchaeologists, which became a vade mecum for all ASOR vol-unteers. Everyone who ever participated in an ASOR dig,whether at Gezer, Hesi, Idalion, Hesban, or elsewhere, willremember Mel’s daily admonition to keep one’s head coveredand to drink plenty of water. Whoever ignored this advice paida heavy price that need not be detailed here.

Mel was a regular visitor to all ASOR-sponsored digs, in-cluding those in Israel, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Cyprus, and Tu-nisia. Medicine was his vocation; archaeology was his avoca-tion. As well as being a physician, Mel was a marvelous am-bassador. He loved the whole Middle East, treating everyonewith profound respect and always ready to help anyone inneed of his services.

Those of us of the older generation who knew Mel Lyonswell will always remember him for his genuine kindness andcaring. Our condolences go to his wife, Celia, and to his chil-dren, who shared his love for the people of the Middle East,both past and present.

As was said of Job, Melvin Lyons was “blameless and up-right.”

Philip J. King(Donations in memory of Melvin Lyons can be made to ASOR,

656 Beacon St., 5th floor, Boston, MA 02215-2010)

24

Emily Teeter, curator of the new Egyptian Gallery,commented, “The renovation has given us the chance tocompletely reevaluate what artifacts will be displayed, howthey will be shown, and what information they will relate tothe visitor. The new climate control systems have enabledus to exhibit a far wider range of especially fragile andinteresting objects, such as ancient clothes, mummies andpapyrus documents that were never before on display.”

Among the many treasures from the Oriental Institute thatwill be exhibited for the first time are clothing, including afinely woven linen tunic with a detailed key-hole neck, andleather sandals from about 1500 BC; a rare limestone waterclock; tools used in the mummification process; dishes andother objects used during the funerary banquet of KingTutankhamun; animal mummies, including a falcon and anelaborately wrapped shrew; sections of carved and paintedtomb walls; and elaborate necklaces of semiprecious stone.

A selection of human mummies, including that ofMeresamun, a singer in the Temple of Amun who is enclosedin a brightly painted coffin, and the mummy and coffin of aman named Petosiris, will be prominently featured in themiddle of the gallery. Both had been highlights of theprevious installation.

The public opening on Memorial Day weekend (May 29-31) will feature a “Celebration of Ancient Egypt,”three daysof festivities for all ages. Special programming planned forthe weekend includes films, exhibit tours, music,demonstrations of ancient Egyptian arts processes, costumedcharacterizations from ancient Egyptian history, and hands-on activities, crafts and storytelling sessions for the wholefamily. The Egyptian Gallery will be open for extended hoursfor the “Celebration of Ancient Egypt.” Hours will beSaturday, May 29, from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.; Sunday, May 30,from noon to 5 p.m. and Monday, May 3, from noon to 5p.m. For additional information about programming, contactthe Museum Education Office at (773) 702-9507.

Egyptian Gallery of the Oriental Institute Museumat the University of Chicago Reopens May 29

The Egyptian Gallery of the Oriental Institute Museum atthe University of Chicago ,1155 E. 58th Street, will reopen tothe public on Saturday, May 29, with three days of specialpublic programs. This is the first of five exhibit spaces toreopen over the next several years. The Egyptian Gallery willshowcase the finest objects among the 35,000 artifacts fromthe Nile Valley held by the Oriental Institute, one of theworld’s leading centers for the study of the ancient Near East.

The focal point of the new gallery is the monumental, 17-foot tall statue of King Tutankhamun, who ruled Egypt fromabout 1335 to 1324 BC. This statue, the largest Egyptiansculpture in the Western Hemisphere, was excavated by theOriental Institute in 1930. It has been moved into the centerof the Egyptian Gallery where it now can be viewed from allangles.

The Egyptian Gallery uses the museum’s collection ofobjects, dating from 5000 BC to the eigth century AD, toillustrate the life and beliefs of the early Egyptians. Theexhibits focus on topics such as mummification, kingship,writing, society, family, art, tools and technology,occupations, popular religion, medicine, the gods, food,games, clothing and jewelry.

“We are extremely excited about the reopening of theEgyptian Gallery,” said Karen L. Wilson, Director of theOriental Institute Museum. “Ever since the present OrientalInstitute building opened in 1931, the collection has inspiredvisitors to learn more about Egypt and the other civilizationsof the ancient Near East. The complete redesign andreinstallation of the museum, of which Egypt is just the firstphase, provides us with exciting new opportunities to rethinkour exhibitions and to utilize our rich collections ininnovative ways.”

The Carsten Niebuhr Institute, University of Copenhagen, invitesapplications for an Assistant professor (Danish: adjunkt) of NearEastern Archaeology to be filled on 1 August 1999 or immediatelythereafter. Specialization should be in the archaeology of the Levant(Jordan/Israel) in the prehistoric and/or historic periods.Applicants must be able to teach archaeological theory andmethods. The applicant should have obtained a PhD in Near EasternArchaeology or related areas and be able to participate in themanagement of an archaeological field school in the Near East.Relevant experience from field work should therefore be mentionedin the application. In addition, the person employed must be ableto participate in the on-going development of the internet-basededucation that takes place at the institute. Relevant experience orinterest in information technology related to research and educationmay therefore be considered in connection with the evaluation ofthe applicant. In addition, experience in presenting archaeologicalfinds and results to a wider audience will be positively evaluated.Further information may be obtained from Head of Department,Dr. Joergen Baek Simonsen, The Carsten Niebuhr Institute of NearEastern Studies,University of Copenhagen, Snorresgade 17-19, DK-2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark. Tel. + 45 35 32 89 00; fax + 45 35 3289 26, e-mail:[email protected]. Closing date for applications is22 April 1999.

JOBS

The Council for British Research in the Levant (CBRL) is seekinga new Director, to be based in Amman, Jordan. The CBRL funds,facilitates and carries out humanities and particularlyarchaeological/historical research in Syria, Jordan, Israel, Palestine,Cyprus and Lebanon. The Director oversees the CBRL's mainregional office in Amman together with its office in Jerusalem andthe British Council-supported facilities in Damascus. He/shefacilitates British research activities throughout the region and isexpected to conduct a research programme of his/her own. Becauseof our substantial support for archaeological/historical research,we wish to appoint a candidate from the disciplines of archaeology/history/anthropology. We would welcome a candidate onsecondment or paid leave from a university. Salary will be basedon British university pay scales at lecturer/senior lecturer level,plus free accommodation and vehicle use. Details from, andapplication by letter and CV plus two references sent direct to: CBRLSecretary, 29 The Walk, Southport, Lancashire PR8 4BG, England,Tel/fax: +44 (0)1704 569664, Email: <[email protected]>Applications to be received by 7 May 1999.

25

What Goes into a Good Book Review(from the Fall 1998 issue of Editing History)

A book review is considerably more than an assessment of a workby a peer who is knowledgeable in the field; it should also informthe reader in some detail about how and why a particular book isof value and to whom it will be of interest. Some readers will wantto know if and how the book might contribute to their own research,while others will be interested to learn where it fits in thehistoriography and their course bibliographies, and still others willbe trying to determine if it warrants purchase from their limitedlibrary budgets. Finally, some readers will just be interested in whatthey can learn about the subject matter of the book from the reviewand may decide to read in an area of study that is altogether newto them.

The reviewer should keep in mind that the audience for thereview is generally broader than just other specialists. Excessivereferences to the literature in the field take up valuable space andare unnecessary unless a particular point of contrast needs to bemade. The reviewer need not demonstrate his/her own expertise;this is assumed. References by the reviewer to his or her own workare usually inappropriate.

A good book review gives a clear indication in one or twosentences of the subject of the book and of its particular focus. Thescope of the study should be made readily apparent, and the thesisshould be explicitly articulated by the reviewer, even if the authorhas left it rather less so. The reviewer should try to conveysomething of the substance of the book; there is not room tosummarize the entire work, but the review should not be so full ofcritique that the reader is left wondering what the book says. Theorganization of the book should be pointed out and the form orcourse of the argument summarized as succinctly as possible sothat the reader understands the method and approach that theauthor has brought to bear on the subject. Judicious use of briefquotations can be very effective and at the same time convey bothstyle and point of view, but they should always be cited by pagenumber.

There is plenty of room for analysis, criticism, and praise in thereview, but experienced reviewers know that sometimes a well-placed adjective can be more effective than an entire paragraph ofexplanation. Readers should encounter a straightforwardassessment of the originality of the work and where it fits into thehistoriography, but there is not space for a litany of other booksand articles. It is often good to recount the most salient features ofthe author’s analysis, but it may not be possible to enumerate themall. There should always be an indication of the types of sourcesthat have been consulted together with an assessment of howeffectively they have been used. The review might indicate howreadable the book is, and for whom, by commenting on style. Thecritic should point out significant errors or omissions, but a longrecitation or minor errors is not appropriate or useful. There shouldbe an indication of who would enjoy or benefit from reading thebook as well as some statement as to its overall contribution.

Writing an effective, balanced, fair, and informative bookreview—in just a few hundred words—is an art. Not every scholaris suited to it, but when it is done well the reader has a good senseof whether a book will be of use or interest and of just how andwhy it might be so, together with some important information onthe subject at hand and where it might fit into our knowledge ofthe past.

ASOR Web Page Revamped

The redesigned ASOR home page http://asor.orgcontains a wealth of information about ASOR, itsoverseas centers and affiliated projects, and links tosites on related topics. New features enable you toregister electronically for the 1999 annual meeting andeven to renew your ASOR subscription from thecomfort of your computer terminal!

The Helpful Hints page is designed to save you time,giving details of whom to contact for informationabout the Annual Meeting, for travel arrangements andto get information on, or to order, any of ASOR’spublications. The book listing on the Publications pagegives complete details of books that ASOR haspublished, together with availability and publishers’information. Clicking on Membership, and going tothe bottom of the page will link you to Scholars Press,where you can download a form, or renew your ASORmembership electronically.

The Calendar of Events provides details ofinternational and domestic meetings and symposia,and the Overseas Centers page links to the web sitesfor the W. F. Albright Institute, the Cyprus AmericanArchaeological Research Institute and the AmericanCenter of Oriental Research.

The E-mail Address List gives the address of anymember who wishes to be on it, and the MembershipDirectory links to the Scholars Press site where fulldetails of any ASOR member may be found.

The site is designed to be user friendly, and representa broad range of topics of interest to ASOR membersand others. If you have any comments, questions,suggestions or relevant links you would like added,or if you find any problems with using the site, pleasee-mail us at [email protected]

Coming Soon from ASOR!

The Greek and Latin Inscriptions ofCaesarea MaritimaBy Clayton Miles Lehmann and Kenneth G.HolumArchaeological Reports Series Pub. date 8/99

Archaeology, History and Culture inPalestine and the Near East: Essays inMemory of Albert E. GlockEdited by Tomis KapitanASOR Books Series Pub. date 9/99

On the Way to Nineveh: Studies in Honorof George M. LandesEdited by Stephen Cook and Sarah WinterASOR Books Series Pub. date 10/99

26

New from ASOR

Ancient Naukratis: Excavations at a Greek Emporium in EgyptPart I, The Excavations at Kom Ge’if (AASOR 54)Albert Leonard, Jr.The final report of the excavations conducted 1977–1978 and 1980–1983 at the southernend of the ancient city of Naukratis, a Ptolemaic Greek commercial center in the Egyp-tian Delta. The report includes a reevaluation of the evidence for Sir William FlindersPetrie’s “Great Temenos.” Andrea Berlin presents the corpus of Ptolemaic pottery fromthe site. The volume also contains reports from experts on the faunal and floral remainsas well as on the material culture.

“A highly competent final publication of first class fieldwork” —Sharon Herbert0-7885-0392-8 cloth 415 pages $124.95 850204

Scholars Press825 Houston Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329

Tel. (404) 727-2354 or 888-747-2354 • Fax. (404) [email protected]

ANNUAL MEETING INFORMATION

ScheduleThe 1999 ASOR Annual Meeting will take place at the Cam-bridge Marriott, Cambridge, MA, from November 17–20(Wednesday through Saturday). There has been a reductionin registration over last year in some categories. Participantsmay now also register on-line using their credit cards. Your$90 registration fee entitles you to participate in all the aca-demic sessions, the ASOR Grand Reception, and the plenarysession.

Please keep in mind that the hotel rate ASOR has negoti-ated is based on fulfilling a contracted number of room nightsand committing to a guaranteed dollar amount for food func-tions. This makes it very difficult to cover our costs with ourregistration fees. By staying at the conference hotel, you willhelp us to meet our committment.

TransportationSpecial airfares have been negotiated by Academy Interna-tional Travel, Inc. with Delta Airlines. 5% discount off low-est published domestic fares roundtrip on Delta are avail-able. Special zone fares that do not require a Saturday nightstay are also available. To receive the discount, your travelarrangements must be made through Academy InternationalTravel Service, Inc., 1852 Century Place, Suite 105, Atlanta,GA 30345, USA. Tel: (404) 321-6943 or (800) 476-6943. Fax:(404) 633-7865 and e-mail: [email protected]. Note thatby making your travel arrangements through AITS, you ben-efit ASOR. A travel fax form will be available in the ProgramBook to be included as an insert in the Summer issue of thisNewsletter.

HousingAccommodations are at the Boston Marriott Cambridge Ho-tel, Two Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142. A spe-cial meeting room rate of $119 single or double has been ne-gotiated. In order to receive this special rate, all reservationsmust be booked through Academy International Travel.

Public transportation isavailable from the airport di-rect to the CambridgeMarriott Hotel.

A housing form will beavailable in the ASOR AnnualMeeting Program and Ab-stract Book, which will ap-pear with the Summer issueof this Newsletter.

Cancellations or ChangesHotel accomodation ques-tions, changes and cancella-tions should be directed toAcademy InternationalTravel, Inc. until October 15,1999. After this date, please contact the hotel directly. Notethat cancellations must be received at least 72 hours prior toarrival date.

ErratumOn page A2 of the Program Guide and Call for Papers in-cluded with the Winter Newsletter, Mark Chavalas’ phonenumber was incorrect. His correct phone number is 608-785-8350. Mark Chavalas is the contact person for individualpaper proposals.

DeadlinesMay 1 Deadline for submission of program materials by sec-

tion chairsJune 1 Travel reservations open with Academy Travel.July 6 Program and Abstract Book mailed to ASOR mem-

bers and non-member preregistrants.Sept. 15 Deadline for applications for Lindstrom and Dorot

Student Service Scholarships.Oct. 15 Housing reservation deadline. After this date, please

contact the hotel directly.Nov. 12 Preregistration ends.Nov. 17 1999 ASOR Annual Meeting begins, Cambridge

Marriott, Cambridge, MA.

27

April 18–20, 1999Hellenism in the Land of Israel (167 BCE-135 CE), a conference co-spon-sored by the Divinity School and the Committee on Jewish Studies of theUniversity of Chicago, and the Department of Theology of the Univer-sity of Notre Dame. University of Chicago. Swift Hall Third Floor Lec-ture Room.

April 21–23, 1999The First Jewish Revolt: Archaeology, History, and Ideology. Jointlysponsored by the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Studies,University of Minnesota, Minneapolis and the Department of Classics,Macalester College, St. Paul, Minnesota. Speakers include Erich Gruen,Martin Goodman, Eric Meyers, Tessa Rajak, Anthony Saldarini, RichardHorsley, Neil Silberman, and Hanan Eshel. Registration fee: $50. Con-tact: Prof. J. Andrew Overman, Dept. of Classics, Macalester College, St.Paul, MN 55105, tel. (651) 696-6375, email: [email protected] ORProf. Andrea M. Berlin, CNES, 330 Folwell Hall, University of Minne-sota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, tel. (612) 626-7371, email:[email protected].

April 30–May 2,1999Byzantine Eschatology: Views on the Last Things. Dumbarton OaksByzantine Symposium. Under the direction of Professors George Den-nis and Ioli Kalavrezou, an international group of seventeen scholarswill investigate the beliefs and practices of the inhabitants of the Byzan-tine Empire concerning death and what follows death on both the indi-vidual and the cosmic scales. The speakers will address the liturgical,legal, popular, and artistic aspects of funerals and burial, as well as theremembrance of the departed in homilies and letters of consolation. Fur-ther topics to be discussed will include what the Byzantines believedhappened to the soul after death, its journey and judgment, and its abil-ity to intercede for the living. The theology of death, resurrection, apoca-lyptic elements, and the notion of final restoration will conclude the pro-gram.

May 20–22,1999International Conference on “La questione delle influenze vicino-orientali sulla religione greca” to be held at Consiglio Nazionale delleRicerche (CNR), Piazzale Aldo Moro 7, Rome, Italy. Organizers are theInstitute for Phoenician and Punic Civilization (mlib.cnr.it/bodies/ifp.html) and the Institute for Mycenean, Aegean and Anatolian Studies(http://www.mlib.cnr.it/bodies/ima.html). Contact Prof. Dr. Paolo Xella,Istituto per la Civilt‡ Fenicia e Punica, C.P. 10, via Salaria km. 29,300, I-00016 Monterotondo Stazione (Rome), email: [email protected]. Fax+39.06.90672461

June 13–15, 1999A Conference on the Mandaeans, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Contact: J. F. Coakley, Dept. of Near Eastern Languages and Civiliza-tions, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138. E-mail:[email protected]

August 23–27, 1999Seventh International Conference of Demotic Studies, University ofCopenhagen. The Conference will be organised by the Carsten NiebuhrInstitute of Near Eastern Studies. Submit the title and an abstract notlater than April 31, 1999. There is no theme for the conference as a whole,but given the nature of the contents of the collection of papyri inCopenhagen (the Carlsberg Papyri), it is hoped that due attention will begiven to the study of literary texts. Contact: Paul John Frandsen andKim Ryholt.

September 20–27, 199914th International Congress for Christian Archaeology. Vienna, Aus-tria. Theme: Early Christianity between Rome and Constantinople. Con-tact: Kongreßsekretariat, c/o Abteilung für Frühchristliche Archäologieam Institut für Klassische Archäologie, Universität Wien, Franz Klein-Gasse 1, A-1190 Vienna, Austria. Tel.: ++43/1/313 52 - 242, Fax: ++43/1/319 36 84. E-mail: [email protected].

MEETING CALENDAROctober 4–8, 1999

Fourth International Congress of Hittitology, Würzburg, Germany. Thefocus of this Congress will be on philological, historical, cultural, reli-gious, linguistic, and archaeological aspects of Ancient Anatolia. Con-tact: 4. Internationaler Kongress für Hethitologie, Gernot Wilhelm, Institutfür Oriental. Philologie, Universität Würzburg, Ludwigstrasse 6, D-97070Würzburg, Germany. Tel. ..49 (0)931-31-2862, 2861. Fax: ..49 (0)931-31-2674. Tel./Fax: ..49 (0)931-92989. E-Mail: [email protected]

October 8–9, 1999Electronic Publication of Ancient Near Eastern Texts. The Oriental In-stitute of the University of Chicago is pleased to announce a conferenceon the electronic publication of ancient Near Eastern texts. The focuswill be on Web publication of “tagged” texts using the new ExtensibleMarkup Language (XML), although other aspects of electronic publica-tion may also be discussed. XML provides a simple and extremely flex-ible standardized syntax for representing complex information and fordelivering it over the World Wide Web (for more details see http://www.oasis-open.org/cover). Furthermore, it is based on proven approachbecause it is a streamlined subset of the Standard Generalized MarkupLanguage (SGML) that has been used for electronic publication world-wide for more than a decade. XML therefore makes possible quite pow-erful and efficient forms of electronic publication via the Internet, in-cluding academic publication of philological and archaeological data.

To obtain more information or to register your intention to attend,please contact David Schloen <[email protected]> by e-mail or atthe following address: David Schloen, Oriental Institute Electronic Pub-lication Conference, 1155 East 58th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637, tel:773-702-1382, fax: 773-702-9853. www-oi.uchicago.edu/OI/INFO/XML_Conference_1999.html

October 10–11, 1999The Twelfth Annual Klutznick Symposium: “The End of Days?:Millennialism from the Hebrew Bible to the Present.” Hosted byCreighton University’s Klutznick Chair in Jewish Civilization and Cen-ter for the Study of Religion and Society, Omaha, Nebraska. ContactLeonard Jay Greenspoon, Chairholder of the Klutznick Chair in JewishCivilization ([email protected], phone 402-280-2304, fax 402-280-1454),or Ronald A. Simkins, Director of the Center for the Study of Religionand Society ([email protected], phone 402-280-2504) at CreightonUniversity, 2500 California Plaza, Omaha, Nebraska 68178.

November 7–11, 1999Human Remains: Conservation Retrieval and Analysis. Williamsburg,VA. This conference is being organized by the Departments of Conserva-tion and Archaeology at the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation. Con-tact: Emily Williams, Department of Conservation -BHW, The ColonialWilliamsburg Foundation, P.O. Box 1776, Williamsburg, VA. 23187-1776,fax: (757) 565-8752; tel. (757) 220 7079, email: [email protected].

November 17–20, 1999ASOR Annual Meeting. Cambridge Marriott, Cambridge, MA. Contact:Rudy Dornemann, ASOR at BU, 656 Beacon Street, 5th floor, Boston, MA02215-2010. Tel: 617-353-6574; e-mail: [email protected]. www.asor.org/AM/AM99.html

November 20–23, 1999SBL/AAR Annual Meeting. Hynes Convention Center and the SheratonBoston Hotel and Towers, Boston, MA. Contact: AAR/SBL Joint Ven-tures Office, P.O. Box 15399, Atlanta, GA 30333-0399, Phone: 404-727-2343,Fax: 404-727-5140, Email: [email protected].

December 27–30, 1999AIA/APA Annual Meeting. Dallas, TX. Contact: AIA, 656 Beacon Street,Boston, MA 02215-2010. Tel. 617-353-9361; fax. 617-353-6550; email:[email protected].

28

The American Schools of Oriental Research The ASOR Newsletteris a non profit, scientific and educational Billie Jean Collins, Editororganization founded in 1900. Assistants: Chris Madell, Holly Andrews

P. E. MacAllister, Chairman of the Board e-mail: [email protected]: 404-727-2348

Joe D. Seger, President Suite 330, 825 Houston Mill RoadAtlanta, GA 30329

James F. Ross, Secretarywww.asor.org

Ingrid Wood, Treasurer

Albert Leonard, Jr. Chair, Committee on Publications The ASOR Newsletter (ISSN 0361-6029)is published quarterly by the American

David McCreery, Chair, Committee on Archaeological Policy Schools of Oriental Research

Victor Matthews, Chair, Committee on the Annual Fax NumbersMeeting and Program ASOR 617-353-6575

ASOR Publications 404-727-2348Rudolph H. Dornemann, Executive Director ACOR 011-962-6-844-181

AIAR 011-972-2-626-4424Billie Jean Collins, Director of Publications CAARI 011-357-2-671-147

Copyright 1999 by The American Schools of Oriental ResearchASOR is located at Boston University, 656 Beacon Street, Boston, MA 02215-2010; Tel. (617) 353-6570.

The American Schools of Oriental ResearchPublications OfficeSuite 330, 825 Houston Mill RoadAtlanta, GA 30329

Non Profit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDPermit #1040

Leesburg, FL 34748

Moving? Please fill in the information below and return withthis mailing label to:

Scholars Press Member/Subscriber ServicesPO Box 15399Atlanta, GA 30333-0399

Name __________________________________________Address _______________________________________________________________________________________City ___________________________________________State ________________ Zip ______________________Country ________________________________________Moving Date ____________________________________Membership Number ______________________________

albright appointees hold Òworld of the bibleÓ magazine ...volume 49, number 1...

Documents