strata

STRATA Bulletin of the Anglo-Israel Archaeological Society

Volume 32

2014

The Anglo-Israel Archaeological Society 300 Regents Park Road London N3 2JX

Contents Editorial

5

in MEMoriaM Lord Allenby of Megiddo

11

raM Gophna and Yitzhak paz From Village to Town to Village Again: Settlement Dynamics in the Central Coastal Plain and Adjacent Shephela from the Late Early Bronze Age I to Early Bronze Age III

13

rachEl hallotE A New Suggestion Regarding Plaque Figurines and a New Figurine from Khirbet Summeily

37

orit pElEG-Barkat and YotaM tEppEr Between Phoenicia and Judaea: Preliminary Results of the 2007–2010 Excavation Seasons at Horvat ‘Eleq, Ramat HaNadiv, Israel

49

tali Erickson-Gini Oboda and the Nabateans

81

Yoav arBEl An Austrian Lloyd Seal from Jaffa

109

Book Reviews

119

Books Received

175

Lecture Summaries

177

Reports from Jerusalem

183

Grant Reports

202

Notes for Contributors

207

7

Strata: Bulletin of the anglo-iSrael archaeolocial Society 2014 Volume 32

A New Suggestion Regarding Plaque Figurines and a New Figurine from Khirbet Summeily Rachel hallote Purchase College SUNY

Introduction and Context During the second season of excavations at Khirbet Summeily, an Iron Age site in the northern Negev desert, a fragmentary plaque figurine was found near the surface of a newly opened excavation area. The figurine is typical of the plaque type, but a brief analysis of its specifics will lead to a new interpretation of the use of plaque figurines in general. It is suggested that plaques are talismans that specifically represent human women post-partum, as they recover from childbirth. Khirbet Summeily is a small Iron Age village site, located 4 km west of Tell el-Hesi, in the northern Negev desert, along a branch of the Wadi el-Hesi (Nahal Shiqma), map reference (OIG) 12040 10815 (Fig. 1).1 While the site has been known to archaeologists since Petrie surveyed the region in 1890, it had not been previously excavated. Extending over 24 dunams at its largest point, Summeily is a subsection of the larger site of Horvat Soreka, which includes Ottoman and Mandate Period remains. Excavations at Summeily began in 2011, and two seasons of excavation have taken place so far, co-directed by James Hardin (Cobb Institute, Mississippi State University) and Jeffrey A. Blakely (University of Wisconsin-Madison).2 Based on preliminary ceramic analysis, the site appears to have almost exclusively Iron Age remains, largely Judahite in character, and mainly dating from the 10th–8th centuries BCE, with a smattering of Philistine ceramic material. The excavators believe that that the site is located on or near the border between Judah and Philistia (see Hardin, Rollston and Blakely 2012:31). 37

Rachel hallote

Fig. 1. Location of Khirbet Summeily

Find Spot and Description the surface of a newly opened excavation area in the northern part of the site (Fig. 2).3 th –9th centuries weights excavated just below topsoil levels, we suggest that this was a weaving area within a domestic sphere (see Blakely and Hardin in prep). 5.1 cm on the right side, is 3.8 cm wide, and varies between 0.5 and 1.0 cm in thickness (Fig. 3). It is made of a porous clay, and is light brown in color, 7.5 YR 7/4 on the Munsell scale. It bears no evidence of paint or slip. The surface is badly have been made in an open mould. pubic region, to the ankles. The feet are missing. The visible features of the body center, but curves pronouncedly upwards towards the sides. There is no decorative treatment on the reverse. On the outermost part of the obverse are traces of what

38

a New SuggeStioN RegaRdiNg Plaque FiguRiNeS aNd a New FiguRiNe FRom KhiRbet Summeily

39

Rachel hallote

might be a frame-like line, slightly more pronounced on the right side than on depicted slightly apart. While the leftmost foot is broken off, the curvature on the right one suggests that the foot itself is partially intact, and extends frontwards (not to the absence of arms next to the body, it is clear that the arms were depicted in a raised position, and would have appeared entirely on the missing top part. Owing arms, style of face, hair, or jewelry. over the years (notably Kletter 1996, Hadley 2000), Tadmor’s typology from 30 will be referred to here (Tadmor 1982; also Tadmor 1996). For instance, the lack placed in a lying down position, not a standing one, which is in line with Tadmor’s are consistent with what Tadmor has suggested might be part of a ledge or edge of the bed (Tadmor 1982:156–157). The fact that the arms were most likely raised various uplifted positions, sometimes with hands cupping breasts, (such as several from Tel Zeror, and other examples) and other times holding an object. As will possibly represent goddesses. Dating In her study of female iconography, Hadley cites a wide variety of examples and Bronze Age, but that they continued to be manufactured into the early Iron Age. a debased style when compared to their late Bronze predecessors. At one point it was thought that later ones were limited to sites in northern and coastal regions, and did not appear at southern sites (Hadley 2000:188; Tadmor 1982:171–172), Shemesh, Kibbutz Revadim, and Aphek, and even Philistine Ashkelon among other southern locations (cf. Hadley 2000:193; Press 2012:75). The Summeily

40


the late Bronze Age, and continued in inland southern Judah in the early Iron Age. of the site as well as stylistically. The preliminary analysis of the ceramics from Khirbet Summeily points to the Iron Age II as the main period of occupation, with th –9th centuries through the 8th century BCE. However, a fair amount of Iron I and a small quantity of LB materials are mixed with the Iron II ceramics (see Blakely and Hardin, in preparation). The existence of some Iron I ceramics at Summeily can be combined with

early Iron Age. Because some Iron I material is known at Summeily, it is likely that from a topsoil context, nothing more precise may be postulated. Discussion southern Levant, although there are catalogues and discussions of human and

by Cornelius 2004:1–4).4 Yet several scholars have long since demonstrated that that most likely represents human women rather than goddesses. the “lying-on-bed” type represent human beings, not deities, as they completely lack any divine symbolism (Tadmor 1982:149, 170). In fact, Tadmor was able to differentiate between this non-divine “lying-on-bed” group and several other bed” group and a different group that stand upright with their feet turned out, wear may be divine.5 Tadmor is followed by Hadley, and both speculated on which concluding that Qudshu, Astarte and Anath, or a combination thereof, are all possibilities (Tadmor 1982:161, 164; Hadley 2000:9, 188–196).6

41

Rachel hallote

In their discussion of images of the divine, Keel and Uehlinger reiterate some of of scholars such as Albright (1939) and Pritchard (1943), and also dispute the bed iconography and the idea of lying rather than standing, in spite of the clear iconography of the feet and “bed frame” (Keel and Uehlinger 1998:99–100). ) But when trying to identify which goddess the plaques represent, Keel and Uehlinger struggle with the interpretation, saying that neither “fertility goddess” nor “mother goddess” is an adequate characterization, and attempting to suggest that the nudity is merely representative of youthfulness or “erotic attractiveness” (Keel and Uehlinger

into a divine “Astarte” category, admits that they have no direct attribute of the divine (Moorey 2003:40).7 Tadmor’s original points about the lack of divine symbolism, the rounded backs which demonstrate they were placed in a lying down position, the extended feet of a Plaque Figurines as Possible Post-Partum Talismans

these small, crudely-formed depictions of nude human women lying on beds? were fertility related (see for instance Dever 2005, Kletter 1996). Their common worship rather than public worship (see, generally, Ebeling 2010 on the association of women’s items with the domestic sphere, and Meyers 1999 and 2007 on the role of women in society via analyses of domestic spaces).

However while a number of these have certainly been found in burials, many have been found in stratigraphic contexts as well, notably in domestic structures (Keel and Uehilinger 1998:100). These two contexts (burial and domestic) both leave open

context of a domestic weaving area). Furthermore, the fact that some were found in funerary contexts allows for the possibility that they were buried with their female owners, although much more careful analyses of funerary contexts would need to be undertaken to determine whether they were buried with women exclusively.8 42


Another quite reasonable suggestion regarding these objects is that they are

hands were occasionally positioned at the genitalia. He interpreted this gesture as representing a woman about to give birth (cf. an example from Taanach, Keel and Uehilinger 1992:99, after Albright 1939:109, 119). Pritchard, who assumed (Pritchard 1943:87, noted in Hadley 2000:188, and Tadmor 1982:171). The suggestions of more recent scholars also mimic this, notably that of Beck, who protect women in childbirth (Beck 1986:31–32). region do not appear pregnant. In fact, rather than general childbirth associations,

recovery period in the days immediately following childbirth, when the mother could represent the recent act of giving birth (or human fertility in general) while concern with nursing, an especially dominant concern in the days immediately following birth, when only colostrum sustains the infant. The position of lying exertion of giving birth. The hypothesis regarding recovery in a post-partum period is strengthened by the fact that in biblical Judah there was a clear societal acknowledgement of a purity laws demonstrates this. According to Leviticus 12:1–7, after giving birth to a boy, a mother was considered impure for a total of 40 days, divided into the 7 days between birth and circumcision, followed by another 33 days. After giving birth to a girl, a mother was impure for a total of 80 days, divided into an initial 14 days, followed by an additional 66 days. These periods immediately after birth exempted her from contact with her husband, which in practical and medical terms would allow her body to heal following birth.9 While the intent of the text is to protect the community from impurity from the post-partum distarches, it is notable that only the mother is impure, while the child, who was born in the midst of the recognition of the precarious physical state of the mother immediately following childbirth. This post-partum recovery period was one of risk to mothers as well as 43

Rachel hallote

infants. Its length could be loosely measured in time based on the amount, type two phases in the Leviticus text (Milgrom 1991:749). From this, it is possible to palm of one’s hand, or place in the pocket of a garment, represented a successfully recuperating new mother, and would be kept and held by a woman in the weeks they could also represent the concomitant biological issue of this recovery period: the need to nourish the infant to keep it alive. Successful physical recovery as well as nursing were primary physical concerns were likely talismans that were held by women as a method of expressing the hope for successful recovery, or possibly to help along private prayers or petitions. If certainly have been buried with her, now representing the cause of her death. Conclusion As a small, somewhat isolated village site, Khirbet Summeily was probably protected by the nearby Judahite fortress of Tell el-Hesi. In spite of its location, whole based in Jerusalem (see Blakely and Hardin, in prep.). Just as the site itself there is no evidence of either any standard Canaanite cultic traditions nor any Philistine or Judahite ones. However, early Iron II levels at the site include what zoomorphic head of an animal placed nearby (idem).10 This very interesting cultic installation merely emphasizes the various local traditions that seem to

folk religion, was found at such a site adds weight to the hypothesis that this type of any major goddess, and is therefore human, not divine. Based on its stylistic kept as an heirloom, possibly handed down for several generations, and was contextually it comes from topsoil, more generally, it might have been from a domestic area (potentially a courtyard area) where the female-dominated domestic task of weaving took place.11 in general, could have been used as a talisman by individual women in the weeks

44


following the birth of a child, as these women would not have strong associations or connections with a dominant temple cultic tradition. Notes 1 All graphics in this study are courtesy of William Isenberger, for the Hesi Regional Project. 2 The project is supported by the Cobb Institute of Archaeology of Mississippi State University, with additional support from the Institute for Jewish Studies Program of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and the Jewish Studies Program of Purchase College SUNY. Core team members came from all three institutions. Object registration G–42/20/1 I.55.002 MC 013 MCR 1061 OR 130 (26/6/12) 4 Cornelius notes his own intent to produce a cataloguing study of the plaque type (Cornelius 2004:15 note 47). also depict human women lying on beds, but which are Egyptian in style. 6 These goddesses have also all been linked in an inscription which includes all of these but published by I. Edwards in 1955. 7 See also Ziffer, Bunimovitz and Lederman 2009, and Paz 2007. 8 While morphological analyses of skeletal remains from southern Levantine tombs are often not practical, associations with other items, such as jewellery, and as opposed to weaponry, could shed light on gender (see generally Hallote 1995). part of these days meant abstinence, but generally it was understood to last for entirety of the period (see Milgrom 1991:748–750). The longer length of impurity following the birth The linkage of impurity to post-partum secretions is paralleled in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Hatti, as well as other lands. 10 The excavators suggest the head is of a lion or lioness, but another possibility is that it represents an ovicaprid. 11 See for instance Ebeling 2010:56–59 on weaving as a female domestic task.

Bibliography Albright, W. F., (1939). ‘Astarte Plaques and Figurines from Tell Beit Mirsim.’ Pp. 107–120 in (Paris). Beck, P., (1986). ‘A New Type of Female Figurine.’ Pp. 29–34 in M. Kelly-Buccellati et al. (eds.), 21 (Malibu). Blakely, J. A. and Hardin, J. W. (in preparation).

45

Rachel hallote

Cornelius, I., (2004). . Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 204 (Freiburg). Dever, W. G., (2005). (Grand Rapids). Ebeling, J., (2010). (New York). Hadley, J., (2000). (Cambridge). Hallote, R., (1995). ‘Mortuary Archaeology and the Middle Bronze Age Southern Levant,’ 8/1:93–125. Hardin, J. W., Rollston, C. A., and Blakely, J. A., (2012). ‘Biblical Geography in Southwestern Judah,’ 75/1:20–35. Holland, T., (1975). (Unpublished PhD dissertation, Oxford University). Keel, O. and Uehlinger, G., (1998). (Minneapolis). Keil, C. F. and Delitzsch, F., (1866). (Edinburgh). Kletter, R., (1996). BAR International Series 636 (Oxford). Meyers, C., (1999). ‘Women and the Domestic Economy of Early Israel.’ Pp. 33–41 in A. Bach (ed.), (New York). Meyers, C., (2007). ‘From Field Crops to Food: Attributing Gender and Meaning to Bread Production in Iron Age Israel.’ Pp. 67–84 in D. R. Edwards and C. T. McCollough (eds.), (Boston). Milgrom, J., (1991). (New York). Moorey, P. R. S., (2003). : (Oxford). Paz, S., (2007). (Fribourg). Press, M. D., (2012). (Winona Lake). Pritchard, J. B., (1943). e, American Oriental Series vol. 24 (New Haven). Sugimoto, D. T., (2008). (Tokyo). Tadmor, M., (1982). ‘Female Cult Figures in Late Canaan and Early Israel: Archaeological Evidence.’ Pp. 139–173 in T. Ishida (ed.), (Winona Lake). Tadmor, M., (1996). ‘Plaque Figurines of Recumbent Women: Use and Meaning,’ 25:290–296 (Hebrew).

46


Whitekettle, R., (1995). ‘Leviticus 12 and the Israelite Woman: Ritual Process, Liminality and the Womb,’ 107:393–408. Ziffer, I., Bunimovitz, S., and Lederman, Z., (2009). ‘Divine or Human? An Intriguing Plaque Figurine from Tel Beth-Shemesh,’ Ägypten und Levante 19:333–341.

47