Table of Contents

B.A.R. Acknowledgments
3

Chapter I: A General Introduction 4

All titles available from: Chapter II: History of Research 10

Hadrian Books Ltd, 122 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 7B:p, England Chapter III: Typology 28
Chapter IV: Chronology 40
Chapter V: Distribution Patterns
The current BAR catalogue, with details of all titles in print, post-free prices 43
and means of payment, is available free from the above address. Chapter VI: Aspects of Manufacture 49
All volumes are distributed by Hadrian Books Ltd.
Chapter VII: Damage Patterns 54
Chapter VIII: Archaeological Contexts 57
Chapter IX: Analogies to the Judean Pillar-Figurines 68
Chapter X: Notes about Function and Meaning 73
BAR S636
Figures 1-40
82

The Judean Pillar-Figurines and the Archaeology of Asherah Abbreviations and Bibliography 114

Appendixes and Keys

R Kletter 1996
Introduction and Keys to Appendixes 1-2 135
ISBN 0 86054 818 X
Key 1: The Fields of Appendix 1 136
Tempvs Reparatvm Volume Editor: Rajka Makjanic Key 2: Codes for the Figurines in Appendix 1 137
8L Key 3: The Location of the Figurines Today 139
AfoO~ Key 4: List of Site Names
141

A~K1)(;\ Key 5: The Figurines - Holland's Typology 142

Key 6: The Figurines - Engle's Typology 145
tI(1C\(p Appendix 1: Data Base for the Judean Pillar-Figurines
British Archaeological Reports are published by 147
Appendix 2: Catalogue of Judean Pillar-Figurines 177
~\ TEMPVS REPARATVM Addenda: Figurines 789-854 218
Archaeological and Historical Associates Limited
Appendix 3: Judean Pillar-Figurines of Unknown Archaeological Origin 232
All enquiries regarding the submission of manuscripts for future publication should Appendix 4: Transjordanian Anthropomorphic Figurines 237
be addressed to: Appendix 5: Other Anthropomorphic Figurines 246

David P Davison MA MPhil DPhil
General Editor BAR
Tempvs Reparatvm
29 Beaumont Street
Oxford OXI 2NP
Indexes: 1. Authors 2. Geographical Index 3. Biblical Sources 288
Tel: 01865 311046
Fax: 01865 311047

1
 List of Figures Acknowledgments
This book originated in a Hebrew Ph.D. thesis, submitted to the University of Tel-Aviv in April 1995. The present work is
(Chapter II: History of Research) revised and includes significant additions, especially in chapters II, IX and X. It is a great pleasure to thank first my two
Fig. 1. Attributes of the use and disposal offigurines (after Voigt 1983)
supervisors, Professors Pirhiya Beck and Nadav Na'aman. To them lowe most of my knowledge at its very best.
Fig. 2. The quantitative factor in JPFs' studies

(Chapter III: Typology)

During my Ph.D. studies I have received the Wolf Fund Stipend for research students for 1991, a prize from Yad Izhak Ben
Fig. 3. Typology of other figurines
Fig.3b. The Relation between the typologies of Holland and Engle Zvi for 1995, and the stipend of the Council of Higher Education for three years (1992-94). I hope that I have not
Fig. 4. Typology - whole JPFs
disappointed my benefactors. lowe a special debt of gratitude to the British Council for a Post-Doctoral scholarship, which
Fig. 5. Typology - hand-made JPFs' heads
Fig. 6. Typology - moulded JPFs' heads enabled me to write this book at ease in Oxford, among whose "natives" I have found much warmth. The advice and
Fig. 7. Coastal and northern moulded types - appendix 5.III
encouragement of Dr. P.R.S. Moorey, Keeper of Antiquities in the Ashmolean Museum, and Prof. HG.M. Williamson,
Fig. 8. Appendix 5.11 and hand-made coastal and northern types
Fig. 9. Phoenician figurines - appendix 5.VI Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University, were very helpful.
Fig. 10. Transjordanian figurines - appendix 4
Fig. 11. Plaque figurines - appendix 5.V
I have derived much information from many Scholars and Institutions abroad, allowing me access to material often not yet
(Chapter IV: Chronology) published. Included among them are the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford; Dr. K. Prag, Manchester University; Dr. 1. Zorn,
Fig. 12. The dating of the JPFs
University of Berkeley, California; L. Keppie, the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow; E. 1. Keal1, Royal Ontario Museum,
Fig. 13. Amended dating of the JPFs
Toronto; B. Isserlin, University of Leeds; P. Watson, Department of Archaeology and Ethnography, University of
(Chapter V: Distribution Patterns)
Birmingham; Lori Iliff, Michael C. Carlos Museum, Emory University, Atlanta; G. Ruffle, the Oriental Museum, Durham;
Fig. 14. The danger of circular arguments
Fig. 15. Distribution of 854 JPFs (sites and main sub-types) Heather Rice, Weingreen Museum of Biblical Antiquities, Dublin; and G.F. Stone, the Australian Institute of Archaeology,
Fig. 16. Distribution map of the JPFs
Melbourne.
Fig. 17. Distribution graph of the JPFs
Fig. 18. Site hierarchy (main sites and sub-types)
Fig. 19. Size of sites, extent of excavations and amount of JPFs
In Israel the help was no less encouraging, including: Prof. Y. Beit Arieh (Ira, Qitmit and Malhata); Dr. Z. Herzog, Miriam
(Chapter VI: Aspects of Manufacture) Aharoni and Lili Singer (Arad and Beer Sheba); Nurit Feig (Arad); Miriam Tadmor (Beer Sheba); A. De-Groot (Ramot,
Fig. 20. Size offigurines and heads (mm.)
Moza and City of David); A. de Groot, Diana Gilbert-Peretz and D. Ariel (City of David); Dr. R. Reich and A. Meir
Fig. 21. Analysis of the white-wash
Fig. 22. Production of a series offigurines (after Nicholls 1952) (Mamila); Prof. M. Kochavi (Malhata); O. Borowski (Lahav); D. Amit (Kh. Geresh and Kh. Anim); Uza Zvulun and Yael
Fig. 23. Classification of the moulded heads
Olenick (Bretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv); Prof. Y. Meshorer, Tallai Oman and Michal Dayagi-Mendels (Israel Museum,
Fig. 24. Example of a series, type B.3.b
Jerusalem); O. Rimon (Hecht Museum, Haifa); Prof. A. Mazar (Tel Batash); Prof. R. Gophna (Kh. Hoga and Mefalsim);
(Chapter VII: Damage Patterns) Prof. D. Ussishkin (Lachish); Dr. G. Barkay (KetefHinom); Y. Dagan (Judean Shephelah survey and Lachish); R. Peled, B.
Fig. 25. Main points of breakage
Brandl and B. Brimer (Collections of the Israel Antiquities Authority); G. Horwitz (Collections of the Hebrew University,
Fig. 26. Breakage patterns of the JPFs
Fig. 27. Breakage pattern of modern clay figurines Jerusalem). I benefited from many talks with Dr. G. Barkay, Orna Zimhoni and G. Kovo.
Fig. 28. A group of modern figurines
Fig. 29. A modern figurine
Fig. 30. Percentage of broken figurines in ancient assemblages I thank deeply my friends and colleagues at the Israel Antiquities Authority and its management; all my teachers, colleagues
and friends at the University of Tel Aviv, and especially Prof. 1. Yakar. I also wish to thank Mrs. Liora Pik and Sarah Vered;
(Chapter VIII: Archaeological Context)
Mrs. Shoshana Noy and Mr. G. Shpigel, all from the University of Tel Aviv. I also wish to thank A. Kennedy; M. Cox
Fig. 31. The archaeological context of the JPFs
Fig. 32. The context - wider generalizations (drawings, figs. 4-11); A. Pikovski (maps, figs. 34-40) and M. Saltzberg (photographs, figs. 28-29). Last but not least, lowe
Fig. 33. A "model" Judean city
much to my dear young friends, Y. Mizrahi and lrit Ziffer.
Fig. 34. Beth Shemesh - season 1933 (distribution map)
Fig. 35. Arad - the Iron Age fortress (distribution map)
Fig. 36. Tel en-Nasbeh - northern area (distribution map)
The only apology I can make for writing this book is that it has not been typed by a wife, nor deprived five little children of
Fig. 37. Tel en-Nasbeh - southern area (distribution map)
Fig. 38. Tel Beer Sheba (distribution map) the attention of a loving father, nor caused grief to a loyal dog. I dedicate it to the memory of my late mother, Haviva.
Fig. 39. Tel Beit Mirsim - SE quarter (distribution map)
Raz K1etter
Fig. 40. Tel Beit Mirsim - NW quarter (distribution map)

3
2

Chapter I: A General Introduction
"It is not about San Michele and your precious marble fragments from the Villa of Tiberius you have been writing the whole
time, it is only some fragments ofclay from your own broken life that you have brought to light"
(Axel Munthe. 1929 [rep. 1991]. The Story of San Michele. London: 3).
The main aim of this work is a detailed study of the Judean
Pillar-Figurines (henceforward JPFs for short), small clay
female-figurines dating to the late Iron Age period. A very
large number of studies has been made on these figurines
during the last hundred years, from monographs and
scientific papers to all kinds of secondary literature. Since
the discoveries of the inscriptions and drawings at Kh. el-
Kom and Kuntillet 'Ajrud, the pillar figurines have drawn
even more attention, being usually interpreted as
ex-pressions of Judean religious beliefs. Anything concerning
the religion of Judah is bound to arouse much interest and,
often, heated debates. Despite the vast amount of research,
the relations between the JPFs and the political borders of
Judah were never adequately studied, and this forms another
major subject of the present work.
I hasten to inform the readers that my intention is an
archaeological examination, rather than a study of the Old
Testament sources about the Asherah. The basic
archaeological possibilities - and limitations - were often
ignored by archaeologists and historians, who wished to
solve the problems of the symbolism and meaning of the
JPFs. Many scholars used the figurines mainly in order to
prove - or disprove - various interpretations of the Old
Testament. For these reasons, I have focused on seemingly
"dry" archaeological aspects, such as dating, context and
distribution. There is such a vast amount of recent literature
on the Biblical Asherah, that it would be superfluous to
offer, once more, a review of all the Old Testament verses
and interpretations concerning her. I will not, however,
avoid taking a clear stand in the debate. Thus, the title of
the book, "The Archaeology of Asherah", is not misleading,
and I hope to justify this title even if only in a very modest
way.
1.1. The Absolute Chronology
The JPFs belong mostly to the 8th and 7th centuries BC.
Judah flourished throughout the 8th century BC, and did not
suffer from the Assyrian conquests of Transjordan and
Samaria (for which see Na'aman 1994:20-24; Becking 1992;
Green, A.R. 1993). The great change came with the
campaign of Sennacherib against Judah in 701 BC, which
forms a sharp divide both historically and archaeologically.
This is, therefore, a vital starting point. The lower limit of
this research is the end of the first temple period in 586 BC.
At this time Judah lost its independence and many of its
settlements were destroyed.
Both Sennacherib's campaign and the Babylonian conquest
of 586 BC did not cause a total change in the material
culture, of course. Difficulties in the historical and
archaeological phasing are not avoided, but will be
discussed later (chapter 1.2-3 below).
There are several absolute chronologies for Judah
throughout the period under discussion, but the differences
between them are measured by a few years only. Those
differences result from contradictions within the Biblical
sources; from the fragmentary state of some Assyrian and
Babylonian sources; from chronological problems (Kitchen
1982-3; Spalinger 1973), and from uncertainty about the
exact calendar used in Judah and Israel (Tadmor 1963:274-
279; Thiele 1965; Na'aman 1986c; Malamat 1983:243-247;
Galil 1991; Kutsch 1974:544f; Edwards 1992; Donner
1986:370-381). On the other hand, archaeological remains
can not be dated accurately within a few years or months,
thus most of the differences between the chronological
systems are negligible for our purposes. For this reason I
will not discuss the absolute chronology, and have followed
one common system (Thiele 1965: Appendix B).
1.2. Historical Background
1.2.1. The campaign of Sennacherib
Sennacherib's campaign in 701 BC formed a major break in
the former peaceful prosperity of Judah. The Assyrian
sources do not describe the event in an accurate geographic
or chronological order. Sennacherib conquered Jaffa and
Ashkelon, restored Ekron (Padi was only later released from
his captivity in Jerusalem) and defeated the Egyptians at
Elteke (Honor 1926; Childs 1967; Tadmor 1985; Na'aman
1974; 1979:61-70; Galil 1988). Then, or at the same time,
Sennacherib attacked "46 cities" in Judah, with the conquest
of Lachish being the centerpiece (as wall scenes from the
palace of Nineveh indicate, Ussishkin 1982). The campaign
was presented as a complete victory with deportations and
transference of Judean areas to Philistia, though Hezekiah
remained in power, Jerusalem was not conquered and Judah
was not annexed to Assyqa (for the Assyrian siege of
Jerusalem see Barkay 1985:67-71; Ussishkin 1979; 1994:5-
9). Some scholars believe that theAssyrians were forced to
withdraw (Tadmor 1985:77; Galil 1988). Na'aman
suggested that Sennacherib was satisfied with the
submission of Hezekiah, and did not aim to annex all Judah
_ otherwise he would have returned and surely succeeded in
doing so (Na'aman 1993:112-115; 1994:25-26).
The Old Testament sources about the campaign are varied.
Micah 1 might reflect it, but in a very obscure way (Vargon
1994; Schmitt 1990; Mittmann 1990). Kings II, 18-19 is our
major source, but it is a composition made of different
materials. Kings II 18:13-16 has the character of a
4 5
chronicle, and seems historically reliable (Gray 1964:513f;
Montgomery 1951:482-485; Rofe 1983:78-79; Tadmor
1985:66; Smelik 1992:101, 124; cf. Seitz 1993). It fits well
the Assyrian sources, except for the minor difference in the
amount of booty taken from Judah. Afterwards, we find two
separate prophetic stories, describing negotiations between
Assur and Hezekiah, with the prophet Isaiah acting as the
"real hero". The first story is II Kings 18:17-19:9a, with
direct continuation in 19:36-37. The second story is
dovetailed into the first (originally II Kings 19:9b-35). Both
stories are probably later and less reliable then the chronicle
of 18:13-16 (Rofe 1983:80-83, against Cohen 1979).1 The
story of II Kings 19:32-35, about the miracle at the end of
the campaign, is legendary and unreliable (for the city list of
18:24 see Zadok 1976; for deportations in general see
Na'aman and Zadok 1988; Na'aman 1993). The description
in the book of Isaiah is mostly similar to Kings II, and need
not be described in detail here (Orlinsky 1940; Clements
1983; Westerman 1969; Smelik 1992; Konkel 1993).
The picture that emerges from the analysis of these sources
indicates how severe was the punishment of Judah: areas
were lost (in the Shephelah probably), heavy booty and taxes
were taken, and there were mass-deportations and the
destruction of dozens of cities. Judah's economy was
severely affected, though Jerusalem was not conquered and
Judah remained independent.
1.2.2. Until the Reign of Josiah (700-639 Be)
This time period is comfortable for discussing the Judean
Kings, but does not form a clear historical period. It is
within a relatively peaceful period, termed the ''pax
Assyriaca" (Na'aman 1987:7-8). Judah remained loyal to
Assyria and enjoyed stability. The conquest of Egypt by
Assyria in 671 marked its zenith (Spalinger 1974a; 1978;
Lambert 1982). There were rebellions in Egypt in 669, but
these were suppressed during 667 and 664 BC. The
Assyrians were helped by a local dynasty from the Delta,
which later became independent under the rule of
Psammetichus I. This was probably achieved with Assyrian
agreement and not by rebellion (Spalinger 1974a:316-320;
1974b; 1976; also Burstein 1984).
The sources about Judah during this period are few. The Old
Testament describes Sennacherib's murder immediately after
his campaign, as if he was punished for attacking Judah.
Actually, Sennacherib was murdered some 20 years later (II
Kings 19:36f; cf. Parpola 1980). Manasseh ruled for 55
years, but very few details are known about his reign from
the OT, and Assyria is not even mentioned. Manasseh was
portrayed as a complete sinner in II Kings 21 (Gray
1964:641-646; Schniedewind 1991; Smelik 1992:131-168).
The Chronicler repeated this picture (II Chr. 33:1-9), but
1These twostories led in the pastto the theory that therewere two
different campaigns of Sennacherib in the west (Mazar, B.
1964:292; Horn 1966; Shea 1985). Against this theory see Rainey
1982b; Spa1inger 1978; Hutter 1982; Kitchen 1982-3:65, n.33;
1983:243. Cf alsoSme1ik 1992: n. 53; VonBeckerath 1992.
then added a story about the capture of Manasseh in
Babylon and his repentance (II Chr. 33:10-17). Many
scholars accepted this as an authentic story (Reviv
1982:136; Elat 1975:66-68; Elat 1977:223; Tatum 1991:
136f; Rainey 1993:147 n. 1, 150ff; Bahat 1981; Barkay
1985: 491-492), but I agree with the view that this is a late,
a-historical "Midrash" (Zmirin 1952:29-31; Curtis and
Madsen 1910:497-499; North 1974:336-338; Smelik 1992:
188; Williamson 1982:388-393; Lowery 1991:185-89).
The reign of Ammon (643/2-641/640 BC) was but a short
interlude of little historical significance (II Kings 21: 19-26;
cf. Na'aman 1989:39-40; Galil 1~92:10, n. 28; Elitzur
1994). Ammon was murdered in obscure circumstances (for
some suggestions about this episode cf. Malamat 1975:85f;
1994:229).
1.2.3. The Reign of Josiah (639-609 Be)
The Assyrian withdrawal from the West left a vacuum, into
which the empires penetrated, first Egypt and then Babylon.
This was a highly important event for the history of Judah,
only its exact date is debatable. The main reason for this is a
gap in the Mesopotamian sources between the latest annals
of Ashurbanipal in 639 BC, and the beginning of the
Babylonian chronicles in 627 BC. Many scholars assumed
an early Assyrian withdrawal, close to the beginning of
Josiah's reign. Assyria was indeed troubled by the
Babylonian revolt of 652-648 BC (Frame 1992: chapter 8),
but it seems that it held the west until ca. 630-620 BC
(following Na'aman 1989:54-56; Bloom 1988:68f). Thus,
the reign of Josiah does not form a real historical period, as
it is divided between the ''pax Assyriaca" and the period of
upheavals following the Assyrian withdrawal.
The Old Testament account of Josiah's reign is focused on
his reform (II Kings 22:3-23:27), which has been connected
with the book of Deuteronomy since De-Wette in the early
18th century AD. The literature on this subject is immense
(for a few monographs see Noth 1943; Weinfeld 1972;
Nelson 1981; Spieckermann 1982; Mayes 1983), but here I
will discuss only the reform and its political significance.
Following the book of Kings, the reform begun in Josiah's
18th year (622 BC), when the book was accidentally
discovered. This reform encompassed the following actions:
1. Concluding a treaty between the king, the people, and
God (II Kings 23:2-3; for treaties in the Bible in general see
Tadmor 1982; McCarthy 1973; Nicholson 1986; Kitchen
1989). 2. Purifying the Jerusalem temple (II Kings 23:4-7).
3. Centralizing the cult by abolition of the other "high
places" in Judah, from "Gebac to Beer-Sheba" (ibid: 23:8-
14). Gebac is probably a city in Benjamin (Aharoni
1987:310; Na'aman 1989:37 n. 66), and not in Ephraim (as
suggested by Galil 1992:1-2). 4. Purification acts in
Samaria, mainly in Bethel (II Kings 23:15).2 This is very
significant evidence: it is highly unlikely that Josiah could
2 The story about the manof God is probably late: Rote 1983:144f,
n. 89;cf Van Winkle 1989:33f
 1.3. Archaeological Background The .Shephelah. Amost all the sites were destroyed:
leave Judah to fight Egypt in the open field, thus it is
act in Samaria prior to the Assyrian withdrawal from Israel. Lachish level III (see above), Tel Batash level II (Mazar, A.
unlikely that he rebelled against Egypt (vs. Malamat
5. Celebrating the Passover feast (II Kings 23:21-23), which and KeIrn 1980:96; KeIrn and Mazar 1982' 1991' Ma
was made into a national feast (cf. Deut. 16:1).3
1975:90; 1988:120-122; Galil1992:11). More probably, he 1.3.1. The Separation of the Assemblages of 1985:306ff, 319); Tel Eitun and Tel Beit Mirsim (Zimh:
was an Egyptian vassal who came to submit to Egypt, but
The story of the reform is totally different in Chronicles: the 8th and 7th Centuries BC 1985:63ff, 82f; Dagan 1992:64); Tel HalifILahav level VIb
was killed for reasons not explained by the author of Kings
there, Manasseh repented, and Josiah could not have had so (Jacobs 1993:5; 1994:152-4; Seger 1988: 143f); Beth
much to purify. The Chronicler attributed the reform to (Na'aman 1989:66-68). W,e ~ve see~ tha~ Sennachrib's Campaign is a clear Shemesh level IIc (Wightman 1985: chapter 10; EAEHL
Josiah's 12th year (II Chr. 34:2-7), separating it from the histoncal startmg point, but it is also an archaeological one. ~ew I:25~; D~g~n 1992:53) and Azeka (according to the
book, with a second later reform (ibid 34:33). The reform In order ~o, under~d this, we have to ask how was Azeka inscription": Na'aman 1994:5f, 17-20. cf. also
was extended to all "the cities of Manasseh and Ephraim 1.2.5. From 609 BC to the Destruction of Sennachenb.s C~Palgn reflected in the material culture of Dagan 1992:27-34; vs. Galil 1995). Tel Judeideh (Goded)
and Simeon and even unto Naphtali" (II Chr. 34:6). Some Judah. Lachish IS the key site in this regard, since today it is was p~rha~s also destroyed at that time (Dagan 1992:44).
the First Temple clear that level III was destroyed not in 598, as suggested by
scholars took this as history (lately, Suzuki 1992:31-37; The situation at Tel Erani is not clear (EAEHL new
Weinfeld 1992: 164f, 166f), but again the view that it is a SW:key. (1937), but during 701 BC (Lachish III:47, 55; IV: 1278-1281). Tel Hesi was not destroyed and is probably
This short period was very dynamic, and there are many
legend, lacking historical significance, should be accepted US~is~n 1977:52ff; 1982; Aharoni 1976; Lachish V).5 The not a Judean site (Oren 1993; Stem 1994; vs. Doennan
references about it in Kings, Chronicles, Jeremiah, Ezekiel
(Na'aman 1989:50, n. 118; Spieckermann 1982:30-41 with dating is c~rro~orated by the finding of remains of a siege 1987: 143ff; Fargo 1987; Toombs 1981; 1983:33).7
and "outer" (especially Babylonian) sources. Egypt probably
further references). To summarise, the reform began in 622 ramp at this SIte (Uss~shkin 1983: area R; 1989; Eph'al
ruled the land of Israel even before 609. In 606
BC and included acts only in Judah, Benjamin and the 198~) and by. ~e mention of Lachish in the ostraca found The N.egev. Sites in the Negev suffered destruction at the
Nebuchadnezzar defeated Egypt in the battle of Carchemish
Bethel region. during ~e Bntlsh excavations (Yadin 1985b:142-143, with same orne or at approximately the same time, e.g., Tel Beer
in Syria (Zmirin 1952:24f; Malarnat 1983:254; 1988: 122f;
earlier literature). The rich assemblage of Lachish level III Sheba level II (see above) and Arad level VIII (Rainey
Wiseman 1985: 21ff; Wiseman 1956:23-26). This defeat
enables us to date other assemblages to the end of the 8th 1987:18-20; Herzog 1984:19-22; Zimhoni 1985:84-87;
brought about an Egyptian withdrawal from Syria. The land
1.2.4. The Story about Josiah's Death (609 Be) centur,Y BC (Zimhoni 1990; 1995; Wightman 1985) Mazar and Netzer 1986:89f). For Tel Ira see Beit Arieh
of Israel became the next battleground, and Nebuchadnezzar
Especially important are the lmlk stamps, which can be no; 1985; 1987; Biran 1985; 1987; Rainey 1993: n. 5).
made repeated campaigns to the west until 601 Be.
related safely to the reign of Hezekiah (Ussishkin 1977'56'
When the Babylonian annals re-appear in 627 BC, the
Na'aman 1979; Rainey 1982). . , The Judean Mountains. In the Southern Judean mountains
situation is already very different from that of 639 BC. In Judah, Jehoahaz succeeded Josiah (II Kings 23:20-22),
Assyria is now fighting for its lif~. The annals are but Necho placed Jehoiakim / Eliakim on the throne instead the situation is less clear. Remains of the 8th century are
S~nce c~ramic typology can not be totally accurate, the known from Beth-Zur (Sellers 1933:53) and Hebron
fragmented, especially for the years 622-617 BC, and the (ibid: 24-26). Judah became a vassal of Babylon during the
diffic~tles of dating grow when we head further away from ~Chadwick 1992:124, 127, 199; Ofer 1990:91; 1993), but it
Assyrian chronology is not secure (Zmirin 1952: chapter 1; days of Jehoiakim (609-598 BC), probably in 604 BC
Na'aman 1989:53-56; Na'arnan 1991; Oates 1965; Wiseman Lachish. . For th~n, we must consider the possibility that is not clear ~ these sites were destroyed. Kh. Rabud may
(Na'aman 1992, not 603 or 605 BC, as Wiseman 1985:23f;
1956:5-23; Brinkman 1984:105ff; Zawadzki 1995). The changes.m matenal culture may not only be temporal, but have been nuned.{Kochavi 1.974:16, 18). It is hard to point
Wenning 1988:190 n. 88; Worschech 1987; Malamat
main line of events is still clear: Nabopolassar became king also regional. Tel Beer-Sheba is a good example: most to clear destruction levels m Benjamin and the Northern
1983:256-259). Perhaps this submission was not destructive
in Babylon in 626 BC and rebelled immediately. After a few scholars agree that the assemblage of Lachish III is similar Judean Mountains. Jerusalem was not destroyed and it is
(Rainey 1975:53-58), but the sources are limited and we
years, Babylon appeared as the victorious side and in 616, to Tel Beer Sheba II, but the date of the latter is dependent hard to date exactly its remains (Mazar, A. 1985:317:
lack details. Three years later, Jehoiakim rebelled, probably
when the chronicles are clear, it is attacking Assyria ~pon ~at of the fi~st, and an exact date can not be fixed by Barkay 1985:420-421; for the excavations see Shiloh 1984:
influenced by the Babylonian fiasco against Egypt in 601-
directly. In 615 Assur was besieged by a combined 600 BC near the Egyptian border (Lipinski 1972). The
~ure arch~eologIcal means (cf. Kenyon 1976:63f, vs. BS 1989; Avigad 1980; 1986; Jerusalem I-II). The same is tru~
Babylonian - Median army (for Media see Diakonoff 1985; I.~f, 76; Naaman 1979:75; 1986:13f).6 Also, in areas that for many smaller settlements nearby, e.g., Ramot and Moza.
Bible describes the immediate "punishment" of Judah
Zawadzki 1988; Dandamayev and Lukonin 1989). Assyria did not suffer from Sennacherib's campaign, our ability to Tel en-Nasbeh flourished throughout both centuries without
(Kings II 24:1-2), but in fact the Babylonian retaliation
was defeated in 612, but its authority still held in Haran for separate the 8th and 7th centuries BC is limited. For any clear destruction levels (TN I-II; Zorn 1993:114, 161).
came two years later, in 598 BC. Meanwhile Jehoiakim died
a few years. During this period, Egypt stood on the side of e~ple, .Jeru~ale~ was not destroyed, and we find a direct Ramat Rabel may have been destroyed (Na'aman 1979:72f:
and Jehoiakin, his son, replaced him. Jehoiakin surrendered
Assyria and sent forces to help several times, including one contln~tlon in ~ts material culture, while the 586 BC Barkay 1993: 10). .
to Babylon (II Kings 24:10-18) and was deported, but kept
destruction there is much more prominent. The lmlk stamps
sent in 609 BC. alive (ibid: 14f, Malamat 1983:269; Begg 1986b). Judah
may. help to date assemblages, but a few jars may have The Judean Desert. Destructions were not identified in this
suffered deportation (ibid:13f; cf. Malarnat 1983:259-262;
Josiah's death should be seen against this background. The continued in.use a little after 701 BC (Mazar, A. 1985:317; area. En Gedi existed already during the 8th century BC
1988: 124f; Wiseman 1965:32-35; 1985:30-32; Rainey
Mazar, Amit and Illan 1984:247f; Eshel 1989: Stem (Barkay 1993, vs. Mazar et. al. 1963:33, 57f). So did
description in Kings (II:23:29) is short and enigmatic. 1975:57f; 1983:17; Green, 1982). The Babylonians placed
Josiah went towards Necho in Megiddo, and Necho killed 1994:19~). ~en only the handles of the jars survived, they probably the smaller Buqe'ah sites, which are usually dated
Zedekiah on the throne as the last Judean king (II Kings
Josiah when he saw him. The terms are problematic (for the may be mtrusrve and are less reliable for dating (Barka only to the 7th century BC (Stager 1975' 1976: also Cross
24:17). 1985'419ft)
. . Al so, the diismibuuon
. of the jars may relate toY
text see Welch 1925; Montgomery 1951:537f; Gray and Milik 1956; Bar Adon 1989; Stem' 1994; Finkelstein
~y other factors (Na'aman 1979:75ff; 1986:14-17; for a 1~93:64~. It seems that Sennacherib's campaign was not felt
1964:678-680. For reconstructions see Frost 1968; Malarnat The reign of Zedekiah (597-586 BC) stood in the shade of
1975; 1983:233-241; 1988: 120ff; Na'aman 1989: 63-68; ~st of stamps see Garfinkel 1988:70; for the origin of the directly m this area.
Judah's bitter end - the rebellion against Babylon and the
Spieckermann 1982:138-153). The story in Chronicles (II Jars see Mommsen, Perlman and Yellin 1984). A summary
destruction of Jerusalem in 58t> Be. The prophetic books of
35:20-24) is very different, and again it seems to be a legend of the m:chaeological effects of Sennacherib's campaign in To sum up, the campaign of Sennacherib had grave results
Jeremiah and Ezekiel contribute many details to our
without historical value (Zmirin 1952:98-102; Malarnat each region of Judah follows. for the JUde~ Shephelah and the Negev (the Edomites may
knowledge, especially about the fate of the capital,
1975:88f; Oded 1977:486; Williamson 1982:408ff; 1982b; Jerusalem (Ma1arnat 1993:275-281). On the other hand, we have. used this opportunity to join in the destruction). It is
1987. Against see Na'arnan 1989:66-68; Begg 1987; North know little about the exact development of the Babylonian possible to divide the 8th and the 7th centuries BC well in
1974:379-381).4 It is very hard to believe that Josiah would campaign against other Judean cities. Egyptian forces came these areas, but in the other areas of Judah the situation is
to the aid of Judah (Jeremiah 37:7-11; 44:30; Malamat 5 A f:w scholars continue to object to this dating (Holladay 1976'
3 See Montgomery 1951:5351; Gray 1964:6731; Curtis and Madsen 1983:286-288), but were obviously not very helpful. Azeka ~~hin~ 1?79:49-53; 1988; 1992), or even to the identificatio~
1910:512-516; Williamson 1982:403-408; Spieckerman 1982:130- and Lachish were conquered by the Babylonians (Jer. 34:7; . e SIte With Lachish (Ahlstrom 1980; 1983 1985' but
Davies 1982; 1985).This view can no longer be held. ' see 7.The excavators dated the end of Gezer VI (area VII) to Tiglath
138. Verses 23:24-27, or at least 26-27 are probably secondary cf. Malarnat 1988:125-128; Wiseman 1985:34-38; Kutsch Pileser's campaign of 734/3 BC (Seger 1987:1241). It was perhaps
(Montgomery 1951:635,Gray 1964:677). 6Th .
1974). Finally, Jerusalem was conquered in 586 (for the the e suggestions to lower ~e date of Beer Sheba II to well inside destroye~ also.in 701 BC (there are many lmlk stamps, but these
4 Scholars even explained level II at Megiddo as indication of exact date see Cazelles 1983; Edwards 1992) and Judah 7~ centwy BC (Yadin and Geva 1983; Eshel 1986: the were mainly found out of context). For Gezer see also Na'aman
Jo~i~'s presence (Stern 1989b:243, n. 64; Galil 1992: 11, n. 32). became a Babylonian province. appendix:43) are not convincing. 1988:74; Becking 1992:114-118; Reich and Brandl 1985.
This IS baseless (Kempinski 1993:109-111; Ussishkin 1993:84).
7
6
more ambiguous and our ability to phase the material
remains much more limited.
1.3.2. The Separation of the Assemblages of
the 7th and 6th Centuries BC
How well demarcated is the lower limit of the period under
research (i.e., the 586 BC date)? This question faces similar
difficulties to those seen in chapter 1.3.1 (above), only more
powerful. First, there were quite a few Babylonian
campaigns to the land of Israel between 604-586 BC, and
this complicates the picture. Archaeologically, we can not
date any site exactly within these years. The exact dating
must be judged historically: the end of Lachish level II will
be dated to 586 BC (Lachish III; Ussishkin 1983) while that
of Ekron level lb to 604 or 603 BC (Dothan and Gitin
1987:202, 215; Gitin 1989:45, 47; Na'aman 1992). Of
course sites can also be destroyed in events that were not
recorded, at any given time. For our purposes we can define
the whole period of 604-586 BC as one horizon of
destruction, and the exact dating within it is not very
crucial. Thus, I will use the term "7th century BC" to mark
all the assemblages in Judah that can be dated between 700
and 586 BC. One should keep in mind that there is likely to
be a "late bias" - i.e., the majority of the finds would relate
to the end of the levels concerned, towards the 604-586 BC
destruction horizon.
The second problem is that there are limited written sources
about the details of the Babylonian campaigns against
Judah. Most of the evidence relates to Jerusalem and its
vicinity, and it is hard to assess the situation in other
regions. An even graver problem is the Babylonian period
(586-532 BC). It was more or less peaceful, and left a kind
of a material "tabula rasa" in Judah (despite the pioneering
efforts of Weinberg 1971:204-207; Barkay 1985:298-300;
1989:42; 1993). Sites that were not destroyed in 586 BC
often continued directly into the Persian Period (Barkay
1993; Zorn 1993:183-5), and this hampers our ability to
define the lower limit of the 7th century assemblage. Despite
all these difficulties, 586 BC (or, to be more exact, 604-586
BC) can be set as a clear line for the archaeological phasing,
since many sites in Judah were destroyed then (listed,
according to geographical regions, below).
The Shephelah. In the Shephelah the following sites were
destroyed: Lachish level II (already discussed above), Tel
Batash level II (Mazar A. and Kelm 1980:93, 96f; Mazar A.
1985:307-320) and Azeka (Dagan 1992:34, 261f).
The Judean Mountains. Ramat Rabel level Va was
distroyed (RR I; RR 1I:119f; Aharoni 1956:143, 151), as was
Jerusalem or at least the city of David level X (Malamat
1988; Avigad 1980:53; Kenyon 1974:170f; Mazar E. and B.
1989). Many small villages surrounding Jerusalem were
probably also ruined. Further south one may probably add
Beth Zur and Kh. Rabud (Kochavi 1973: 55-58; Sellers et.
al. 1968: pls, 18-19; Sellers 1933:53; EAEHL new: 1252).
8 9
The Judean Desert. Here En Gedi level V was perhaps
destroyed (Mazar et. al. 1963:33, vs. Barkay 1993:106), and
also Vered Jericho (Eitan 1984; 1994). Eitan related the end
of this site to the reform of Josiah, but this has no
archaeological basis. The situation at Jericho is not clear
(Weippert, M and H. 1976:145, 148; EAEHL new 11:680),
but in fact Jericho belonged to Israel and not to Judah.
The Negev. This area suffered almost a total wave of
destruction after its flowering during the 7th century BC.
Destructions were found in Tel Malhata (Kochavi 1970:23,
Beit Arieh, personal communication); Arad level 6 (Rainey
1987; Herzog 1987:77; cf. Ussishkin 1988); Tel Ira (Biran
1985; 1987H:26f; Beit Arieh 1985:20, 25; 1987;35); Aroer
level 2 (Biran 1987:33; Biran and Cohen 1981) and Uzah
level 4 (Beit Arieh 1986:33, 35; 1987:37f; Beit Arieh and
Cresson 1991:130, 134; for a detailed historical survey of
the Negev in the 7th century BC see Na'aman 1987). Tel
Masos was perhaps destroyed as well (Zimhoni in: Masos
1:130, but cf ibid:124; Kempinsky et. al. 1981:167). The
small site of Kh. Radum was probably deserted (Beit Arieh
1992). The identity of the destroyers at each site is not clear,
whether Babylonians or Edomites, but this is not crucial to
our purposes here.
Benjamin. The area of Benjamin is somewhat an exception.
It is hard to discern destructions there, and this area may
have submitted to the Babylonians without struggle, prior to
the destruction of Jerusalem (thus Malamat 1983:286f;
Eshel 1986:16; Barkay 1993:196f; for another opinion see
Kochman 1982:26). For the lack of destruction at Tel en-
Nasbeh see Zorn 1993:161-162. 8
1.4. Archaeological Sub - Phasing of
the 7th Century BC?
Can the 7th century BC in Judah (or, better defined, the
period of 700-586 BC) be separated into archaeological sub-
phases? If this is possible, we would be able to date finds
much more accurately, and to relate them much better to
historical processes.
We have seen earlier (chapter 1.2 above) that the reigns of
the kings of Judah do not form real historical periods, and
that a clear separation should be recognized between the pax
Assyriaca (the first half of the.7th century BC) and the
period of struggles following the Assyrian withdrawal (ca.
630/620-586 BC). Judah may have gained a certain amount
of independence in between these phases, but this would
have been a very short and exceptional period, if at all. Of
course, archaeological phases are not always dependent
upon historical ones. Can archaeological sub-phases be
8 Lately,Barkay has opposed the setting of the end of the IronAge
in 586 BC (1993). For our purpose, 586 BC is the only possible
date, since we deal only with Judah, which certainly suffered
greatly and lost its independence at this date. The question of
terminology (i.e. whether the 6th century BC is part of the Iron
Age)is not important in this regard.
established, considering that the separation of the 8th and
7th centuries BC as a whole was achieved only some 20
years ago?
A suggestion for four archaeological sub-phases within the
7th century BC has recently been made (Yadin and Geva
1983; Eshel 1986), but it can hardly be accepted, for the
following reasons:
1. The suggested phases were built upon the reigns of the
Judean kings, rather than on an independent archaeological
basis (and we saw that these reigns do not constitute
distinctive historical phases, chapter 1.2. above).
2. Archaeologically, dating to a margin of 20 or 30 years is
impossible for Iron Age Judah. For example, see the
different dating suggested for the end of Tel Beer Sheba
level II (chapter 1.3 above), from 720 to 701 BC or even
later.
3. The phases noted by Yadin and Geva (1983: table p. 284)
are often valid for a few sites, or one site only. These phases
often designate only minor changes and alterations in a
restricted locality. At no site do all all four phases exist, and
only four sites (of the 19 discussed by Yadin and Geva) have
evidence of three phases. In some cases, Yadin, Geva and
Eshel defined "phases" which are not recognized by the
excavators of the sites, e.g., at Lachish (cf. Ussishkin
1993:133f; Zimhoni 1990:47). At Tel Beer Sheba, for
example, there is no "level I", other than one wall with
scanty remains (BS I:6f). Surprisingly, Yadin and Geva
(1983) ignored Jerusalem completely - the capital of Judah.
The reason is clear: Jerusalem does not fit their fourfold
division at all.
4. Yadin and Geva (1983), as well as Eshel (1986), did not
accept the separation of the 8th and 7th centuries BC, as is
accepted by almost all the archaeologists today (see chapter
1.3.1 above).
5. The suggested fourfold division is combined with very
simplistic explanations of material culture, ignoring basic
arc~eological limitations. For example, Yadin and Geva
claim that the East-Greek pottery can be dated accurately
within a margin of 10 years (1983:250). This may be true
for later periods, but not for the Iron Age (cf. Bowden 1991:
see also the new dating proposed by Wenning 1989;
accepted by Waldbaum 1994).9 Furthermore, the East -
Greek pottery surely has no special relation with Judah, and
the same holds true for the engraved tridacna shells (found
allover the ancient Near East, Brandl 1984; Reese and
9 For the East-Greek pottery in the Levant and its chronology see
Boar~an 1980; 1988; Collombier 1987; Cook 1992. Lately it
wasfound alsoat Kabri, see Niemeier 1994.
Sease 1993). According to the logic ofYadin and Geva, one
sherd of pottery is enough to prove Judean control at remote
sites, even at Tel Keisan which was part of Phoenicia. Most
of this criticism is true for the work of Eshel as well (1986),
but he dealt mainly with ceramic assemblages, which
require a separate discussion.
Another alternative was suggested lately by Oren, following
his important excavations in the southern coastal plain.
Oren separated an Assyrian phase (701-640 BC) from a
later "Egyptian" phase (640-540 BC; Oren 1991:13-15;
1993). The excavations at Tel Haror, Tel Shera, Ruqeish
and other sites in this region have not been published fully
yet, thus Oren's suggestion can not be explored in detail (for
preliminary reports see Oren and Netzer 1974; Oren 1982;
Oren 1986). However, it seems that this is also an historical
separation, based on an early date for the Assyrian
withdrawal from the west. Even if this phasing fits
Philistia, it may not fit other parts of the land of Israel.
Moreover, most of the finds from the so-called Assyrian
phase are not typical of Judah; and there is nothing clearly
Egyptian in the material culture of the second phase. The
basic problem in this phasing relates to the dating of the
sites. At first, Oren dated destructions at Tel Haror and Tel
Shera to the end of the 7th, or early 6th, centuries BC (Oren
1988:136). Later Oren changed this dating to ca. 640 BC.
This was done according to the assumption that the sites
were ruined by Egyptian campaigns against the withdrawing
Assyrians (Oren 1991). Yet, the Egyptian 26th dynasty was
an ally of Assyria (cf. part 1.2 above), thus Oren's
reconstruction is unlikely. Perhaps a few sites were ruined
in 640 BC, but surely the 604-586 BC destruction horizon
would be much more substantial, and should therefore be
preferred for the dating of destructions at sites in Philistia
and Judah.
In the future, the 7th century BC may perhaps be divided
into two sub-phases, but currently this is not possible. We
have to recognize the fact that the first half of the 7th
century BC "slips between the fingers", since no large-scale
destruction occurred. For the archaeologist this means lack
of rich destruction levels and clearly dated assemblages.
The remains of the 7th century BC belong mostly to the
second half of the century (and the beginning of the 6th
century BC). For these reasons, all the efforts to identify
king Manasseh's supposed building projects are very
problematic, even if we take the Chronicler's version to be
historically reliable (e.g., Tatum 1991). The archaeological
limitations, unfortunate as they are for scientific
scholarship, must be fully acknowledged, otherwise the
whole picture might be biased from the very beginning.

Chapter II: The History of Research
"...After such knowledge, whatforgiveness? Think now
History has many cunning passages, contrived corridors
And issues, deceives with whispering ambitions
Guides us by Vanities... Gives too late
What's not believed in, or if still believed,
In memory only, reconsidered passion"
(T.S. Eliot, 'Gerontion').
The Judean Pillar Figurines (henceforward, JPFs for short)
were discovered in the nineteenth century AD, and since
then discussed in many monographs and papers, not to
mention the wealth of secondary and popular treatments.
These figurines have been found in almost every Iron Age II
excavation in Judah. I have defined several phases in the
complicated history of research, but the separating lines
between each phase are not always decisive, and the
publication dates are often more important then the actual
dates of excavation. I will comment only briefly on many
studies, which are discussed in detail in the following
chapters. A simple representation of the quantitative.
progress of research is given in fig. 2.
11.1. From the Nineteenth Century to
the Excavation of Gezer (1912)
One of the first JPF ever found was brought by father
Berkeley to the British Museum in 1865, as part of an
assemblage from a grave near Bethlehem (app. 2:7). Very
little was known about these figurines then, so Clermont-
Ganneau doubted its authenticity and could not date it
clearly (1884:224). It was fully published only a hundred
years later (Tubb 1981). Other JPFs found their way into
private collections, e.g., the Ustinov collection, later donated
to the Museum ofUppsala (Supinska-Levset 1976; 1978:17-
20, no. UT5).
Since the beginning of the 20th century the term "Astarte
figurines", together with the notion that these are
representations of fertility goddesses, became common (for
plaque figurines already at the end of the 19th century AD,
Clermont-Ganneau 1896:6f, 242; cf. Contenau 1914:94:ff).
Vincent suggested that these figurines had been deliberately
broken during rituals (1907:161-163). Contenau (1914:94ff,
100) made a general survey of naked female figurines from
the Near East, including Cana'an, but mainly pertaining to
the 3rd and 2nd millenniums BC (and without mentioning
the pillar figurines).
The publication of Macalister's excavations at Gezer in 1912
marks the end of this phase of research. The excavations at
Gezer (Gezer II-III) and Beth Shemesh (Mackenzie 1912)
gave access, for the first time, to relatively large
assemblages of JPFs. These assemblages could now be
dated, at least crudely, and provided some information on
their context. Soon afterwards, the first world war caused
an interval in the archaeological activity, and the British
10
mandate that followed has to be seen as a very different
period (chap. 11.2 below).
At Gezer, Macalister defined the figurines as cult objects,
usually as representation of goddesses (Gezer 11:411) or the
Biblical teraphim (Macalister 1915:270f). The figurines
were broken on purpose during magical rites (Macalister
1905:270f). Macalister separated plaque figurines, shaped as
a rectangular lump of clay with frontal moulding (Gezer
11:411-416), from pillar figurines which are made in the
round. He believed that the last are a Cypriot form of a
nurturing goddess (dea nutrix - ibid:417). At that time, large
amounts of Cypriot Iron Age figurines were already known.
Macalister noticed that the pillar type was later than the
plaque type, dating this type to his late Semitic IV and
Persian-Hellenistic levels (Gezer 11:417). Unfortunately,
due to the unfortunate method of his excavations at Gezer,
almost all the JPFs that he found there have no clear
archaeological context.
Mackenzie's work in Beth Shemesh (1912) deserves the
highest regards. His report of the first season is clear and
detailed, even to the point of giving exact locations for
figurines found inside a certain grave (cf. app. 2:8-9).
Mackenzie thought that the hand-made, pinched head
variation of the JPFs represented a Semitic figure, due to its
facial features (possibly the aquiline nose - he did not
specifythe reasons for this conclusion). Two figurines from
tomb 5 were seen as a pair of gods (cf. below, app. 2:8-9),
an idea followed recently by Wenning (1991). For
Mackenzie, the figurines were cultic idols of gods that
protected human beings. They were put in the graves as an
expression of magic (Mackenzie 1912:76-77). Mackenzie,
like many other scholars of his generation, separated sharply
religion from magic, following the work of Frazer (1890; for
criticism cf. Voigt 1984:168 n.I; Versnel 1991; Ritner
1992). I will discuss this question more thoroughly below
(chap. IX). Mackenzie (1912:54) also used the name
Astarte for the pillar figurines.
11.2. Between the Two World Wars:
the "Astarte Phase"
During this phase, there occurred a significant acceleration
in the quantity of excavations in the land of Israel under the
British Mandate, and many studies on the JPFs were
published. The changes were not only quantitative (fig. 2
below), but qualitative as well. Albright was the most
influential scholar until the end of this phase, signified by
the excavations at Lachish (though these were published
only in 1953 (Lachish III).
TI.2.t. The Study ofPilz (1924)
Pilz made the first comprehensive study of figurines from
Israel. It was part of an unpublished thesis titled "Yahweh
and the female goddess". Pilz catalogued 123 figurines of
all periods, including metal, stone and faience figurines
(1924:133-145). He arranged these by the position of the
arms (ibid:157), separating "plaque figurines" (his types A,
B) from pillar figurines (C), tambourine players (0), etc.
(ibid:140). Actually, Pilz catalogued only 12 pillar figurines
from Gezer, dated after 1000 BC (ibid:145, 150, 161). He
understood most of the figurines as "Gdtterdarstellung",
except the tambourine players, which he perceived to be
representations of human beings. Pilz offered varied
explanations for each type of figurine, and for the pillar
figurines he hinted giving milk. by a goddess or a mother, or
Cypriot / Phoenician 'Astarte' figures (pilz 1924:161).
Nevertheless, he made some interesting remarks. First, he
noted that if these were indeed female goddesses, then the
monotheistic cult of Yahweh did not suppress her cult
(ibid:167); this critical attitude is unusual for archaeologists
of this phase. Secondly, Pilz noted the small size of the
figurines, thus they were not cult statues (Kultbilder) but
only smaller copies of statues, still representing goddesses.
Pilz also suggested that the figurines were related to
"popular religion" (ibid:161, but without further discussion).
He did not try to relate them directly with the Old Testament
and his general attitude was cautious:
"Religionsgeschichtlich muss sich unsere Typen-
vergleichung die Archaologisch so lohnend war, wollen wir
auf festen boden bleiben, mit dem wenigen oben Gesagten
bescheiden" (pilz 1924:167).
TI.2.2. Major Excavations during the 1920's
and 1930's
These excavations formed a large data-base of JPFs, for the
first time. The final report of the excavations at Beth
Shemesh offered a short synthesis, and a date from the 10th
century BC and later was suggested for the pillar figurines
(AS V:155). This date was based on an early date for tomb 1
at this site.1 The excavators exempted themselves from a
detailed study with the excuse that Albright was preparing
one on the same subject.
This Albright did, but he dealt with the plaque figurines and
gave only a short summary about the pillar figurines
(Albright 1939:117-119). Albright dated the pillar figurines
to the 7th-6th centuries BC and called them "nurturing
goddesses". In his view, some of the heads had been made in
Cyprus (ibid:120). More detailed was the Tel Beit Mirsim
report from 1943 (TBM III). 39 pillar figurines were
1 Many scholars adopted this dating, e.g., IBM Ill:69; Pritchard
1943:24, no. 203; Holland 1975:330; Engle 1979:20.
11
mentioned, but obviously many more "unidentifiable"
fragments were discarded (TBM 1II:69). All were ascribed
to level A and dated to the 8th century BC and later. More
specifically, one figurine from silo 32 was seen as the
earliest (cf. app. 2:229), while all the other pillar figurines
were said to belong to the last hundred years of level A
(pertaining to the 7th century BC, but now commonly dated
to the 8th century BC). Albright saw no great differences
between pillar figurines from Tel Beit Mirsim and from
Megiddo, and discussed the context only for the purpose of
dating. Against the explanation of female figurines,
Albright explained figurines of horses, males, a woman
carrying a child and women carrying lamps as toys or
amulets (ibid:142).2 Perhaps more important was the
technical report by Kelso and Thorley (in TBM III: 138-
141). They believed that two JPFs' heads were brought from
Phoenicia because of their superior quality over other badly-
fired "local Astartes". Kelso and Thorley also related the
pillar body with a tree, that was used in the cult of Asherah
(ibid:138).
At Tell e-Nasbeh, all the human figurines were of the pillar
type (TN 1:145), and a very clear definition of the two major
variations was formulated: the "pinched head" and the
mould-made head. Both variations were seen as
contemporary. The excavators gave the numbers of all the
figurines that have been found, including small fragments
not published with drawings or photographs (ibid:246, 273,
map fig. 50c). Some 150 JPFs had been discovered, all from
level I (except one or two), dated to 750-450 Be. The
excavators believed that the JPFs had been deliberately
broken (ibid:245), and were amulets or homely icons, not
used in official temples. They had not been found in tombs
at this site, supposedly because they were not used as
concubines or female replacements during internment
rituals (but probably the tombs found at Tel en-Nasbeh
predate the period when these figurines became common).
In the summary, the JPFs were termed Astarte figurines and
examples of the prophetic condemnations, but they have also
been considered as votive objects and "evidence of the extent
to which magic ruled the minds of the ancients". Their
crudity and small size indicate that they are cheap tokens,
that replace "by magic and ritual the place of the real object
in religion" (ibid:248). In the same breath, the authors
suggested that the figurines were manufactured by
uninstructed potters, perhaps chiefly women, being part of a
local worship (TN 1:248).
Excavations outside Judah helped to define other types of
pillar figurines, especially at Samaria (Samaria 1:348f, #Bl)
and Megiddo (May 1935). At Megiddo, all the
anthropomorphic figurines were explained in connection
with religion (cult, mortuary cult, mother-goddesses, etc.).
2 A somewhat different view was proposed by Albright in his book
"Archaeology and the Religion oflsrael" (1942). There he claimed
that Iron Age II pillar figurines have no similarity to the Cana'anite
plaque figurines; and that the Israelites used these figurines as
amulets for help during birth or as expressions of "sympathetic
magic"; thus, "in no case can we label them with the name of a
goddess" (Albright 1942:115).
Even animal figurines were not seen as mere toys, but as
related to cults of bulls or herds (May 1935:28, 34). The
important thing was the recognition that the type of pillar
figurines so common in the south "had little influence" at
Megiddo - other than one exceptional figurine (May
1935:31, reg. no. M.I776; app. 2:102 in the present work).
11.2.3. The Monograph of Pritchard (1943)
This monograph indicates well the state of research at the
end of the Astarte phase. Pritchard discussed 249 female
figurines of the Bronze and Iron ages in Israel. 52 of these
were termed pillar figurines, his type VII (pritchard
1943:56, nos. 189-240). These included many figurines that
cannot be termed thus today, like juglets, figurines with
legs, women holding birds, etc. (ibid: catalogue nos. 199,
218-221, 225, 236-240).3 Pritchard dated the pillar
figurines to after 1000 BC, following Albright at Tel Beit
Mirsim." He noted that pillar figurines appear also in
private loci, thus being private property (ibid:87). Pritchard
though that their origin was Cyprus or Mesopotamia
(ibid:53, 87).
Pritchard's conclusions were cautious: the nature of all three
major goddess mentioned in the Old Testament, Astarte,
Asherah and Anat, is quite similar (pritchard 1943:59-81).
Thus, there is no unequivocal evidence for the identification
of a specific goddess with the pillar figurines (ibid:2-4, 85-
87). Pritchard believed that the pillar type was a direct
continuation of the plaque figurines depicting a woman
holding her breasts, thus perhaps indicating a symbolic
representation of womankind, or mother goddess, or private,
domestic cult of milk-fertility (ibid:83, 87). In this way, a
rather peculiar mix of explanations is given in Pritchard's
summary, but his caution is much more appealing then
arrogance, which is, unfortunately, not uncommon among
archaeologists.
11.2.4. Popular and Other Short Allusions
during the 'Astarte' Phase
Popular works are not necessarily worse than scientific
papers, and are usually simpler to analyze. Driver saw the
figurines from Gezer as images of home - gods, especially
Astartes, without discussing the pillar figurines in particular
(1922:56-58). For Watzinger (1933: 117), the pillar
figurines were a direct continuation of the Bronze Age
plaque figurines, therefore evidence for the continuation of
the domestic cult of the female nature goddess. The specific
term Astarte appears only in the labels to the photographs
(Watzinger 1933: pI. 40:96, 98; cf. also Reifenberg 1927:90-
96).
3 Of the 52 figurines he termed "pillar", I have defmed only 12 as
JPFs in the present study(cf. fig. 2).
4 His catalogue nos. 191-2 from Megiddo were dated to the Iron
AgeI, but these are not JPFs (following my detinitions).
12
Hooke (1938:25) barely mentioned the figurines: "Vast
numbers of Astarte figurines and amulets showed how
widespread was the use of such charms for apotropaic or
fertility purposes".
Burrows (1941:220f) managed to call the figurines every
conceivable term, all in the same short section: Astartes,
"dumb and helpless idols" (though this is less likely),
household deities like the Biblical teraphim, expressions of
sympathetic magic, images of the mother-goddess, votive
objects and playthings. Otherwise, Burrows just repeated
the words of Albright and Pritchard.
Galling thought that all the figurines were goddesses of life
and fertility. This is evidence that the war staged by the
Israelite religion against the goddesses was not always
successful since the Israelites used, to a certain extent, these
figurines (Galling 1937:230). Galling also hinted that major
goddesses, such as Anat or Asherah, were paredos of the
male god - but he did not explicitly identify these goddesses
with the figurines:
"Sie lebten mit ihrer kleinen Abbilden als kraftgelandes
Symbol der vis natur in der privaten Sphare .des
israelitischen Hauses. Soweit man die weiblische Gottheiten
als Grossgdtter ansprechen darf (Anath, Aschira), sind sie
Paredoi des M3nnIichen Gottes" (1937:233).5
The opinions of Galling are exceptional for this early stage
of research, preceding the "Asherah phase of research" by
more than thirty years.
World War II terminated this phase of research, though not
as sharply as did World War I earlier. One l~t wo~d
concerns the title of this phase - "Astarte". Dunng this
period, the term Astarte was very commonly attached ~o the
pillar figurines (as well as to other types of figunnes).
Earlier, it was used mainly in respect of the plaque
figurines, but these figurines were not yet separated well
from the pillar figurines, and the term was used mutually for
both kinds. Furthermore, many scholars who saw these
figurines as representations of a goddess related them with
forbidden or foreign cults; fitting them to the Old
Testament's descriptions of foreign, condemned goddesses
like Anat or Astarte. The term Astarte remained popular
much later, somewhat ironically, and a few scholars use it
even today (e.g., Haran 1992:331).
s.
5 The secondedition of his book, from 1977, holds no significant
changes in this regard.
11.3. From World War II until 1975
11.3.1. The Contribution of New Excavations
Many important excavations have taken place during the
present phase, e.g., those at Lachish, Jerusalem (by
Kenyon), Gibeon and Ramat Rabel.
Tufnell ascribed the JPFs at Lachish to level III-II, i.e., 8th-
7th centuries BC (Lachish III:374). She lowered the date of
the figurines from Beth Shemesh tomb 1, by arguing that
only the beginning of the burials there are from ca. 900 BC,
but the tomb continued to be used later; thus the figurines
are probably later (ibid:377). The Tel Beit Mirsim pillar
figurines are distinctive from the Megiddo pillar figurines,
although Albright disagrees. Still, many of these figurines
are only "crudely playthings" or "homely symbols", lacking
any artistic value (ibid:374). The moulding of the heads
was technically good, and they were all made in one place,
while the bodies were made locally at each site (Lachish
III:375). Occasionally, the report glided into unwarranted
generalizations. For example, it was suggested that the pillar
figurines may have represented the naked goddess, a
goddess returning to Israel and to Greece (and having a
shared Assyrian origin - ibid:377). Regarding the horse-and-
rider figurines, Tufnell wrote that:
"The simultaneous introduction of equestrian figures is a
further sign of northern pressure, commemorating, perhaps,
these bands of horseman from the northern steppes
[meaning the Scythians] whose descendants had reached
Egypt by the middle of the seventh century" (ibid:377).
A very large quantity of pillar figurines was discovered in
Kenyon's excavations in Jerusalem. Kenyon (1967: 101)
was very assured about the meaning of animal figurines: "it
is always possible to say that an animal figure has no greater
significance than that of a toy." On the other hand, female
pillar figurines are mainly "elemental mother - goddess" and
"fertility cult objects" (ibid). Kenyon suggested that horse
figurines are related to the "sun horses" that are mentioned
in II Kings (cf already Samaria III:78), especially because
of the applied disc that some horses carry between their ears
(though this phenomenon is quite rare among the Judean
horse figurines). Many female pillar figurines were found in
cave I, which Kenyon believed to be a temple's favissa.
These figurines were not related to Yahweh, in her view:
"The association of these female figurines with a fertility
cult, abhorrent to the worshippers of Yahweh, is very
obvious" (Kenyon 1974:141). The fullest publication of the
JPFs from Kenyon's excavations at Jerusalem was written by
Holland (whose work I will discuss in detail in chap. 11.3.4
below).
In Gibeon, 54 JPFs were found in the great public pool (of
which only 27 were published with a photograph or
drawing: Gibeon WS). The excavators tried to date the
figurines by their relative depths within the pool, but
following Pritchard (1943), they suggested that the pillar
type was used in Palestine in the IOth-6th centuries BC.
13
However, they limited the range to the 8th-7th centuries BC
(Gibeon WS:15-17).
Many JPFs were found in Aharoni's excavations at Ramat
Rabel, but were only partly published (RR I-II). Aharoni
used the term Astarte, but did not state a clear view about
the identity of these figurines. 6 Ciasca's detailed study of
the horse-and-rider figurines from this site was important,
showing the ability to identify small fragments. She often
managed to identify broken parts through changes of color
resulting from exposure (or lack of exposure) to oxygen
during firing (Ciasca 1964:95-100; cf. her publication of the
Tell Erani material, Ciasca 1962; 1963).
A very important contribution was made at that time by
Gophna (1970), despite its brevity. Following small scale
surveys, Gophna defined clearly a pillar type of figurine
typical of southern Philistia (1970:27, 29). This type is
clearly different to the simple, pinched, hand-made type of
figurine which is typical of Judah and rare in the coastal
plain (ibid:29, pI. 6:6; cf. app. 2:68 below). Gophna dated
the figurines and the sites to the 7th-6th centuries Be. He
also suggested precise dating to Josiah's reign, but it was
made via historical considerations, and did not depend on
archaeological evidence (Gophna 1970:30).
Excavations outside Judah, especially those at Hazor,
Ta'anakh, Samaria and Ashdod, were also important to the
study of the JPFs. At Ta'anakh, the figurines are earlier
than the JPFs, but Lapp noted the lack of the "Dea Nutrix
figurine, typical of the Iron Age II in southern Palestine"
(Lapp 1967:37; cf. Lapp 1964). Assemblage E207 at
Samaria contained many figurines (Samaria III:76),
explained as votive objects related to different goddesses.
Horse figurines were related with a sun cult; pillar figurines
with a mother goddess; a woman and child figurine with
Isis, etc. (Samaria III:77-78). The figurines were
supposedly signs of foreign, non-Yahweistic cult:
"These poor relics do help to quicken our understanding the
of the mingled scorn and pity which they [the OT prophets]
pour on the people of Samaria - scorn of their adultery, and
pity for their desperate state under the threat of the Assyrian
invasion" (Samaria III:79).
Ashdod is important for the definition of the assemblages of
the southern coastal plain. Most of the figurines from
Ashdod were found in area D which was termed cultic,
while the figurines were called Astartes (Ashdod I:137-139).
In the following report (Ashdod II-III: 125), Hachlili related
the figurines from area D to domestic and industrial
contexts. The comparisons that she found to the figurines
from Ashdod lack examples from Judean sites, but she did
not make an explicit allusion to this fact. She suggested that
the variety of figures indicates that they were not gods, but
6 The same is true for his textbook "The Archaeology of the Land
ofIsrael" (Aharoni 1978)and his Tel Beer ShebaReport(BS I). In
a popular book, though, Aharoni defmed a JPF from Arad ~
Astarte, a fertility goddess of Cana'anite origins (Aharom
1971b:l13-114).
individual human beings (Ashdod II-III: 128, 132). At the
same time, female figurines were explained by Hachlili as
votive objects, which were used to enhance fertility or to
assure female safety by sympathetic magic (ibid: 113).
Animal figurines were explained in various ways: as burial
gifts, as symbols of sacrifices of animals (of the species
represented by the figurines), and even as toys (Ashdod 11-
III:134-135).
D.3.2. The Research of Reed
In an important study, Reed (1949) discussed the
problematic nature of the Asherah, which seems to appear in
the Old Testament sometimes as a female goddess and other
times as a cultic object. Reed concluded that the Asherah
was a cultic object in temples, both in the cults of Yahweh
and Ba'al. This conclusion was based on the places and the
verbs which are related to the Asherah in the Old
Testament, as well as on other cultic objects mentioned
beside it. In some instances, Asherah is an image of a
goddess called Asherah (Reed 1949:53, 95).
Reed (1949: appendix 1) rejected simplistic identifications
of the Asherah with various material objects. He wrote that
even if the Asherah was made of wood, it does not imply
that every wood, tree, or pole is an Asherah (1949:37). He
criticized harshly, and rightly, the many identifications of
the Asherah with all kinds of trees, groves and poles, since:
"When one assumes, as he has no right to do, that the
Asherah was a tree or a pole, then the field becomes a large
one and every stylized tree or upright pole may be called an
Asherah" (Reed 1949:3).
Reed separated small figurines found in domestic buildings
and large Asherah statues that stood in public temples
(1949: 72 n.14). The clay figurines are not "Asherim",
though Reed did not cancel out the possibility that some of
them represented goddesses, which we can not yet identify
specifically. Reed did not discuss the JPFs in particular, but
his study presented a well balanced and critical attitude to
the question of the Biblical Asherah (as opposed to many of
the later "Asherah studies").
D.3.3. General Allusions and Popular
Literature
Many allusions to the JPFs have been made during this
phase of research, but only a selection is presented here.
Wright (1957: 117f) claimed that archaeology confirmed the
Biblical ban of idols, since figures of Yahweh were not
found in Israelite sites. The female figurines that were
found there in plenty are only mother goddesses, though less
sensual then their Cana'anite predecessors. Wright perceived
them to be evidence of large scale syncretism within the
common people, verging on polytheism. The figurines were
the property of the common people, who used them as
"good-luck charms" for magical, rather then theological,
14
functions. Even the "unenlightened and tolerant circles in
Israel" understood that Yahweh cannot be worked in a
similar way (therefore one does not find similar
representations of a male god). All this proves the antiquity
of the first two commandments (Wright 1957:118).
A similar view was expressed by Heaton (1974:232); the
figurines were mother goddesses that belonged to women.
They were not idols but "lucky charms" - maybe the famous
teraphim. Heaton (1974:232) liked one of these figurines
from Lachish, which "is more pleasant than usual, but when
she had her cheeks painted red, she must have appeared
distinctly garish". Much more important were the short
remarks made by the Frankens, who noted the difficulties in
the AstartelFertility explanations. The variety of female
types of figurines calls for different represented figures.
Furthermore, it is hard to see all the animal figurines as
related to fertility, since pregnancy or sexuality were usually
not stressed, and some species of animals are missing
(Franken and Franken-Battershill 1963:143). The Frankens
suggested a comprehensive research of figurines according
to the different types and following detailed statistic analysis
and study of distributions and contexts. One should ask is
any type of figurine limited to a certain segment of the
population? What is the relation between the distribution in
cities versus agricultural villages? This ideal plan of
research, however, did not materialize.
Ahlstrom warned about seeing the figurines only as part of
popular religion, since some had been found in the royal
palace at Ramat Rabel (1963:51). De-Vaux (1958:82)
thought that these figurines were toys:
a
"Le petit Israelite passait le meilleur de son temps jouer
dans les rues ou sur la place avec les garsons et les filles de
son ~ge... Ils chantaient, dansaient, s'amusaient avec des
modelages de terre cuite comme on en a retrouve dans les
fouilles; les petits filles ont toujours jou~ ~ la poupee, "
Exceptional among the popular literature of those years was
a book by Patai, called "The Hebrew Goddess" (1967).7
Patai argued that the written sources imply that Asherah and
Astarte were not part of a foreign cult or magical
phenomena, but kosher Hebrew goddesses - even if their
first origin was, perhaps, foreign (1967:25-26, 34-52). He
went as far as to state that Asherah was Yahweh's consort,
and the pillar figurines were used to support this theory.
Patai took it for granted that the naked female figurine
belonged to ritualistic, or religious contexts (1967:30). The
Late Bronze Age plaque figurines, or the Middle Bronze
Age figurines from the temple at Nahariya, were explained
as representations of Astarte. 8 On the other hand, pillar
7 The first chapterof this book appeared originally in JNES 1965.
For a short later summary, but without significant changes, cf
Patai 1987:379.
8 The reason for identifying Astarte with the Nahariya figurines
was their horns. Patai claimed that the homs were related to the
place name "Ashtarot Kamayim" and henceto Astarte (ibid:56, nn.
24, 58-59, 98).
figurines represent Asherah as a domestic goddess which
also has an aspect of fertility. The figurines are not the
large, wooden cult idols, but Patai saw no great differences
between the two. The large quantities of pillar figurines
indicates the extreme popularity that the Asherah had in all
levels of Israelite society. This was perhaps due to the belief
that Asherah helped in giving birth and encouraged fertility
(patai 1967:32-35). Critical scrutiny would show that
Patai's theory is simplified and lacks an understanding of
the archaeological material. Patai quoted from other
archaeologists without criticism (e.g., the view of Albright
that the moulds were imported, Patai 1967:60). For some
reason, the Asherah figurines were discussed in the chapter
on the kingdom of Israel and not in relation to Judah.
Nevertheless, Patai has influenced many of the later
archaeologists (see below), despite the general popular, often
even grandiose, tone of his book: "Is the Hebrew goddess
dead or does she merely slumber, soon to awaken
rejuvenated by her rest and reclaim the hearts of her sons
and lovers?"?
Worthy of note, and on a totally different scale, is an
extensive work by Ucko (1968) dealing with prehistoric
figurines from the Near East and the Aegean. I have
mentioned this work here because of its theoretical
importance. Ucko discussed varied explanations given to
figurines which lack historical sources: mother-goddesses,
dolls, concubines and magical figures (1968:409-414, 420-
423). He made extensive use of anthropological material
(ibid:424fi) and criticized sharply the "mother-goddess"
explanation (ibid:417-419). Ucko thought that in any
assemblage of figurines, there are some types of figurines
that can have more than one explanation; on the other
hand, no one explanation can fit all the figurines in a given
assemblage. It is logical, that the same figurines had several
functions (ibid:426). Important also was the statement that
figurines which have a similar outlook may have
represented different figures (ibid:423-425).
D.3.4. The Dissertation of Holland (1975)
This monumental work is the most thorough study on
figurines from Israel so far, and it marks the end of the
present phase of research. Holland presented 2711 artifacts,
of which ca. 1000 were not published earlier. This work
remains unpublished, other than a short summary (Holland
1977, without significant changes from the dissertation).
Holland separated the discussion into two parts: review by
sites (1975:39-177) and review by types of figurines
(ibid:178-318). This was followed by a short summary
(ibid:319-346). Anthropomorphic figurines were divided
into solid pillars (type A); hollow pillars (type B) and
plaques (type C). 572 specimens were counted in type A
(Holland 1975:319), including hand-made heads (type AI)
and mould made heads (types A.II-AIX). Body fragments
and heads without clear classification where gathered
thereafter (types AX-AXIl, ibid: 194-197). Moulds were
9 Is the tone, in a way, a retlection of the eventful year of
publication - 1967?
15
grouped as type N, with sub-type N.II defined as moulds of
pillar figurines (ibid:314-316). Holland occasionally used
the term Astarte for various sub-types within his A type
(ibid:49, 62, 97, 102, 133, etc.).
Holland followed Albright's chronology, attributing type A
figurines entirely to Iron Age II, until the 6th century Be
(1975:16, 319). He did not discuss separately the date of
each sub-type within group A, and accepted the chronology
of various excavators, or amendments suggested by Kenyon
to various levels. The one JPF from Beth Shemesh tomb 1
was defined as the earliest of its kind (ibid:30). Holland
noted that his type B was not popular "in the heart" of the
Israelite culture (ibid:319); its appearance at Megiddo and
Samaria was ascribed to a large foreign population that
supposedly lived in these Israelite cities. Even the material
and finish of the figurines from Samaria are different from
those in Judah (Holland 1975:163). The appearance of type
B at Tel Gemmeh was explained as having an Egyptian, or
Phoenician influence (ibid:319-320); although this is its
homeland (together with the areas of Samaria and a few
figurines from Transjordan, ibid:330f).
Holland thought that type A was mainly Judean, but it
appeared also a little in the north. Jerusalem seems to be its
homeland (ibid). When discussing the separate types,
Holland did connect directly some sub-types of A with Judah
(1975:181, 183, 187, types AI, A.IV.e, AI.g, etc.).
Furthermore, he quite often used the definition "Judean" in
regard to different specific figurines (ibid: 105, 106). Thus,
Judean figurines at Tel Gat [i.e., Tel Erani] imply that this
was a Judean site (ibid:96). Moulds type N.II were also
called Judean (ibid:324), but as there are almost no moulds,
this conclusion must have been formulated on the basis of
differences between the types of moulded heads.
The archaeological context of the figurines was not really
discussed, other then a general statement that they are found
in various contexts (1975:325, 331). Holland thought that
the figurines were deliberately mutilated, since whole
vessels and broken figurines were found in the entrance to
cave 1 in Jerusalem (ibid:330, 337-338). He believed that
figurines from graves were mother-goddesses which served
as burial gifts. Cave 1 in Jerusalem was a favissa (ibid:327-
329, following Kenyon). Horse figurines may relate to a sun
cult (ibid:342). Even figurines from domestic houses are
cultic (ibid:325); thus, the many figurines from Ashdod area
D strengthen its definition as a cultic area (ibid:55, but this
is rather a circular argument: one has first to prove the
cultic nature of the figurines themselves!). Rarely, Holland
made unwarranted generalizations, e.g., that the large
quantity of pillar figurines at Tel Beit Mirsim shows the
Israelite love of cult-idols, against which the Biblical
prophets complained so much (ibid: 142). The more
elongated face of type A.lV.f figurines is perhaps a hint
about the ethnic origin of the settlers in the coastal plain
(ibid: 189).
A few matters impaired the extensive work of Holland.
First, the cumbersome structure; although Holland's main
aim was to give a full catalogue, there is none in his work. A
reader interested in a specific figurine must recollect the
material about it from various chapters in Holland's work.
The type table (Holland 1975:20-36) is disconnected from
the second volume, where only part of the figurines were
fully described (mainly new, unpublished ones). Many
details are still missing from Holland's work, especially for
the many figurines from Kenyon's excavations in Jerusalem.
So far, Holland's thesis is the main publication of these
figurines (a few were published in the Jerusalem I and II
volumes). Regrettably, Holland often did not give the loci or
registration numbers of these figurines, which are now
spread allover the world. 10
A second major limitation is the typological scheme:
Holland's type A included not only pillar figurines, but any
solid figurine, even those with legs (AXIlI), sitting figures,
peg figurines and even hollow, double-moulded figurines
(Holland 1975: type AIV.g.2-3). This mixture prevented
Holland from reaching clear conclusions about the date and
the distribution of each sub-type. But the major limitation is
the lack of a synthesis for the huge number of artifacts.
Almost no general conclusions were offered (other than ibid,
319-325; 325-329). There was no statistic analysis (Holland
is hardly to be blamed for this, as this would have been hard
to achieve before the era of private computers). Only the
major types (A, B, C) were discussed, but not the many sub-
types; thus, for all the figurines of type A one can find only
a few sentences in Holland's summary (1975:319-320). Only
a few type A figurines from cave 1 were discussed in more
detail, but even this was done briefly. What is the value of a
very detailed typology, if it is not used for synthesis? For
these reasons Holland's work, despite its wide scope and
thoroughness, marks the end of a fruitful phase of research
(rather than the beginning of a new phase).
11.4. 1975-1995, The Asherah Phase
The last two decades have been very dynamic concerning
the research of the JPFs. The prosperity of this research has
much to do with the Asherah inscriptions found at the sites
of Kh. el-Kom and Kuntillet 'Ajrud, and the growing
interest in the study of the religion of Judah and Israel
during the First Temple period.
n.4.1. The Dissertation of Engle (1979)
This work marks the new phase of research, both
chronologically and thematically. The JPFs are discussed in
the opening pages (despite the use of the word Israel in the
general title of the work). Then Engle reviews the sources
10 The drawings and photographs in the photocopy of Holland's
thesis are not always clear, and many figurines were not drawn or
photographed. Thus, despite the correspondence with many
institutions and the kind help of Prof. K. Prag, head of the
Jerusalem project today, it is sometimes hard to identify figurines
in Holland's work with the records kept by Museums and
Institutions.
16
about Asherah. From the beginning, the basic assumption is
that the JPFs represented the Asherah (Engle 1979:1-2).
This identification was made earlier by Patai (1967, see
II.3.3 above). For the Old Testament sources, Engle relied
heavily on the work of Reed (cf. chap. 11.3.2 above). Engle
stressed the principle that a common type is much more
important for study than the various, "obscure" pieces, and
therefore set severe rules for defining what he termed as
"classical pillar figurines". This definition excluded the
pillar types of figurines found at Megiddo (Engle 1979:9,
II). Engle's classical type included most of Holland's types
A II-AIX, 11 while all the other types of pillar figurines
were defined as foreign (ibid:9). Engle excluded from the
discussion at least 183 body fragments (i.e., Holland's types
AX-AXI), claiming that these could not be classified since
the heads were lacking. Holland's types AXII-AXVlI were
also excluded by Engle as being irregular or miscellaneous.
Even the pinched, hand-made heads (Holland's type AI)
were omitted by Engle, on the pretense that they were too
"featureless" for classification (Engle 1979:10).
Nevertheless, Engle criticized the typology of Holland as
artificial and suggested a typology of seven sub-types
according to minor changes in the shapes of the eyes (ibid,
but cf. already Kelso and Thorley, TBM III:140). Another
type of pillar figurine was called "foreign" (type VIII) and
ascribed to figurines from Phoenicia, Ammon, Moab and
Philistia (Engle 1979:14-15).
Engle (1979:19) adopted Aharoni's Iron Age chronology, yet
continued to accept an early date for Beth Shemesh tomb I,
like Albright. Engle also dated figurines from level IV at
Beer Sheba early (ibid:20), thus concluding that the
beginning of the JPFs was around the late 10th or early 9th
centuries BC. Most of the JPFs are from the 8th century
BC, with gradual decline until the 6th century BC (evidence
for such a decline, or explanations why it should have
occurred were not given). Engle suggested that typological
differences were related to chronology: type I may be early,
while type V is late - but he accepted the dating of many
sites without any criticism. He discussed the distribution of
the figurines only briefly, but clearly associated types I-VII
with Judah, since only 2 of the 147 "classical pillar
figurines" were found outside Judah. Therefore, these were
Judean figurines, while type VIII was foreign (Engle 1979:
16 and fig. 13).
The discussion of the contexts was also very limited (Engle
1979:27ft). Engle wanted to prove that the JPFs had
religious function. He admitted that many figurines came
from domestic contexts, and that a few figurines were found
in public or industrial contexts (ibid:29-30). A dozen were
found in tombs, and in his view this is at least a "quasi-
religious" context. Three other JPFs were found in favissa,
11 Holland (1975) had a total of 159 figurines of these types;
Engle had a total of 147 "classical pillar figurines", including a
dozen newfigurines published after 1975.
i.e., a religious context.12 Engle also tried to find a
religious background for JPFs from cisterns, pools and silos,
assuming that they had been thrown there deliberately.
However, this deliberate throwing was claimed first because
only heads had been found, and later because whole
figurines had been found (cf. ibid 30-31). In explaining the
figurines as Asherah, Engle suggested an analogy to Greece,
where figurines seem to be small copies of large cultic
statues (ibid:35). The situation in Greece is much more
complicated than what he assumed to be (cr. Alroth 1988),
and analogies cannot form decisive proof (see more about
analogies in chapter IX below). In summary, Engle
(1979:50-52) suggested that his classical pillar figurines
represented Asherah, since she was the only serious
candidate for identification. He even claimed that the logic
should be turned around: instead of learning from the Old
Testament about the JPFs, the JPFs can teach us about the
identity of the Biblical Asherah. Engle (1979:62-63) also
connected the Biblical plural form Asherim with the JPFs.13
Engle no doubt contributed to our understanding by defining
clearly a Judean type of pillar figurine, and by stressing the
value of a standard type as the main subject of research, but,
there are many drawbacks in Engle's work. It is mainly a
Biblical study, and the JPFs were brought in as outside
support for his theory about the Asherah. The figurines
occupy a minor part of the work (Engle 1979:5-28), and are
not discussed for their own sake. Engle did not check JPFs
with his own eyes and admitted that only someone with
direct access to the material could make a detailed typology
(ibid:10). Nevertheless, he dismissed the detailed typology
of Holland, who had far better direct access to the figurines.
Holland's typology was rejected in favor of a new - though
admittedly an arbitrary - one (Engle's own acknowledgment,
1979:13-14). A major set back is the exclusion of all the
fragments of body-parts and hand-made heads, not to
mention every other doubtful item. It is a very convenient
method, but it left Engle with only a small portion of the
whole corpus of figurines, up to the extent that one wonders
whether the general conclusions can be considered valid.
The so called foreign type was not studied closely, but
presented like an unimportant leftover. The geographic
discussion was simple, and Engle did not even raise the
question of the relations between the JPFs and the borders of
Judah. For example, he took the JPFs and the lmlk seal
impressions to be contemporaneous and claimed that they
fitted the evidence in the Old Testament - but the use of the
JPFs began much earlier and continued well after the lmlk
stamps, according to Engle's own dating (1979:24-26). The
moulds (or their lack) were not discussed at all.
The main problem about Engle's work is, however, different.
Where is the basis for the main argument that the JPFs
12 Only because Engle accepted the definition of Jerusalem cave 1
as a ''favissa'', and the same for a ''favissa'' in Aharoni's
excavations at Lachish.
13 His attitude towards the Of verses is far from being critical,
e.g., his tendency to accept without questioning the versions in
Chronicles (ibid:63, 68-69).
17
represented Asherah? The Old Testament, regrettably, gives
no evidence that relates Asherah with small clay figurines at
all. Where is, then, the archaeological proof for this
identification? Engle's efforts to attribute religious functions
to JPFs found in cisterns, graves, etc. are feeble and
unconvincing. Even if we adopt them, most of the JPFs still
come from domestic contexts, lacking any clear religious, or
cultic function. As a matter of fact, Engle simply adopted
the old view that figurines were cultic artifacts, and just
changed their title from Astarte to Asherah. True, this fits
more the. date of the pillar figurines, but the proof for the
identification is still lacking.
n.4.2. New Excavations
An impressive number of important sites have been
excavated during this phase of research. Many JPFs were
found at Tel Ira, Tel Beer Sheba, Arad, Jerusalem, Ramot
and other sites. Many of these figurines have not yet been
published, but I was able to include them in this work
through the kindness of the excavators. Among the
publications, the Jerusalem volumes are important for an
understanding of cave 1. The authors explained the cave as
a phenomenon of popular religion: "this cave fits in with the
general picture of popular religion in that period"
(Jerusalem II:127, also 44, 48-50, 125ft). The female
figurines were explained as representations of women who
came to the cave seeking help during illness or birth; but
also as magical objects (Jerusalem II:128; cf. recently
Franken 1995). It is actually the bird figurines who are
thought to have represented Asherah (Jerusalem II:128; for
the pottery from the cave cf. Lagro and Noordhuizen 1987).
Figurines from Mazar's excavation in Jerusalem were
explained otherwise, as foreign cult. It was claimed that they
have been deliberately mutilated by religious reformers
(Nadelman 1989:123). Lastly, a group offigurines from the
Kenyon's excavations have been republished as "new" (Amr
1988; but cr. Franken 1989 and app. 2: nos. 364,371,373,
385, 388, 389 [possibly], 411).
n.4.3. Collections, General Allusions and
Popular Literature
Regarding collections, I will mention only one example to
show the problems involved. It concerns a large group of
figurines offered for sale in Jerusalem's antiquity market.
One part of this group was taken abroad, reaching the
collections of a museum and was published, at least partially
(Jeremias 1993; cf. below, App. 3:77-78). Other figurines of
this group were bought by a rich Texan (thus complained
Jeremias). Archaeology suffered a double damage: the
figurines surely came to light as a result of robbery,
inflicting much damage on the robbed site/s (such a large
number of figurines are unlikely to be a "family
inheritance", as often claimed by merchants). Furthermore,
we do not know the archaeological origins (date, nature of
context, site, etc.) and cannot rely upon anything told by
antiquities dealers. Only the artifacts remained, devoid of
any context.
This criticism should not be seen as general disaproval of
the quality of publications of such finds - these can be
valuable and one good example was offered by Supinska-
L~vset (1976; 1978; on the difficulties of studying figurines
without context see Bailey 1994:323; for the possibility to
identify modern forgery of figurines see Moorey 1994).
Many studies during this phase of research examined the
JPFs. Ahlstrom believed that the JPFs were religious objects,
casting doubts on the picture of "pure", monotheistic
Yahwehism. Ahlstrom was one of the few scholars who
warned that not all the figurines belonged to popular
religion and as something opposed to the official cult. This
was based on the fact that some figurines had been found in
the royal palace of Ramat Rabel (1984:136; 1991:129; cf.
already 1963:51-54). In any case, our ability to separate
popular from official religion is very limited (Ahlstrom
1982:83; cf. 1984:18; 1991:127-129). Ahlstrom accepted
the identification of the JPFs with Asherah and explained
the animal figurines as representations of Yahweh or Ba'al.
He even claimed that the figurines and other archaeological
finds "can correct the picture of the religion which has been
presented by the Old Testament writers" (Ahlstrom
1984:135), since the Old Testament "has turned things
virtually upside down" (ibid:138). Unfortunately, he did not
differentiate between the Judean figurines and other types,
e.g., those from Samaria or Megiddo (ibid:136). It also
seems that he did not fully grasp the limitations of
archaeology, thus his "explicitly archaeological approach" is
not a very profound one. For example, one mouse figurine
led him to the conclusion "this mouse figurine may indicate
that the cult of Beth Shemesh may have been influenced by
the Philistines" (Ahlstrom 1984:121). One head of a horse
from Hazor "indicates that the religion of Israel during the
time of Omri and Ahab included sun worship" (Ahlstrom
1984:127). To derive such general conclusions from so few,
humble and unclear archaeological finds can only be termed
speculative - if not worse. 14
Helga Weippert described the pillar figurines briefly and
cautiously. She thought that they were part of an
assemblage, which included miniature models of furniture.
The meaning of Samaria locus E207 and Jerusalem cave 1
are not clear, but perhaps from the temple at Sarepta one
can suggest a connection of the figurines with cult
(Weippert 1988:629-631). In a later criticism of Keel and
Uehlinger, Weippert (1994:22, 27) accepted their dating for
these figurines to the lOth century BC and later (for Keel
and Uehlinger see chap. 11.4.7 below). However, Weippert
rejected the assumption that the pillar body is related to the
Asherah.
A. Mazar mentioned briefly the identification of the
figurines with Astarte and the difference between figurines
from Israel and from Judah (1990:501-502). Barkay (1985:
14 These are not isolated examples, but a general trend. Ahlstrom
(1984: 131) also claimed that the an-iconic standing-stones in the
temple of Arad represented Ba'al, Yahweh and Asherah (sic); and
that two objects depicting lions from Tel Beit Mirsim indicated
that there was a temple in that city (Ahlstrom 1984:131-2).
18
208; 1990:166) dated the pillar figurines to the 8th-7th
centuries BC. According to his view, they functioned within
domestic fertility cult, related to Astarte or Asherah
(1990:191). Often, a group of several figurines is found
together. The figurines have been deliberately mutilated,
perhaps in relation to Josiah's reform or to the activity of the
Deuteronomistic school. Barkay also suggested that the
hand-made heads were made in the 7th century BC, and are
later than the moulded heads (1990:192).
Briend called the figurines naked idols of a goddess, and
related them to fertility cult. He claimed that they cast
doubts in regard to the depth of the belief in Yahweh among
the common population (Briend 1992:37-38). Whitt just
echoed Ahlstrom's and Dever's opinions: "Archeologists
commonly identify the naked goddess with a fertility
goddess, that is, Asherah ... therefore it is reasonable that
the symbols of horses, bulls and naked women, so common
in Jerusalem, are the symbols of Yahweh and his mate, the
goddess Asherah (=Anat =Astarte)" (Whitt 1992: 48; on
Dever see chap. 11.4.6 below). Haran (1992:331) tried to
identify the Biblical queen of heaven with Mesopotamian
Ishtar, and wrote that: "Some say that in the land of Israel
this name [queen of heaven] was transferred to the
Cana'anite comparison of Ishtar, whose figurines were found
in plenty in archaeological excavations".
For Bloch-Smith, the pillar figurines may have represented
Asherah, but also perhaps teraphim, or "mother of
generation" whose breasts gave milk to babies in the family
(1992:218f, following Bird, for which see chap. 11.4.9
below). Tigai thought that the figurines were not goddesses
but magical figurines, and that they did not imply
polytheism. The evidence for this is the lack of theophoric
names of goddesses from late Iron Age Judah (Tigai
1986:91f, 1987:192f, n.116). It is doubtful, though, if one
can rely so much on the onomastic evidence, especially as it
is negative in character.
Hestrin (1991:57) saw the pillar body of the pillar - figurines
as a symbol of the tree trunk of Asherah, and the breasts as a
symbol of life and nurture given by the mother goddess. At
the same time, the pillar figurines belonged to popular cult.
Coogan (1987:119) explained the figurines as companions
to the national male god, but as part of a popular religion
(without mentioning the specific names of any goddess).
Fritz (1994: 163-5) made a well balanced summary, seeing
the pillar figurines as cultic, but without stating if they were
goddesses or amulets. Miller (1986:245) thought that the
figurines were goddesses, but not Asherah. For other
allusions to the JPFs, without significant contributions, see
Dearman 1992:89f; Halpren 1987:82ff, n.25; 1991:77f, n.I.
Some of the allusions to the JPFs are quite amusing.
Mitchell (1988:73) defined a JPF figurine as "the sort of
thing that could not have been in the hands of any faithful
worshipper of Yahweh" and therefore the owner of the
grave where this figurine was found was "a heretic", one of
those condemned by the prophets. Pettey's thesis was
greatly influenced by the work of Engle, though he
acknowledged the fact that there is no direct proof for the
identification of the JPFs with Asherah (1985:218, 220).
The trouble is that Pettey identified all kinds of "Asherah
objects", from "Hathor" head-rests in Judean burials to
plaque figurines and seals - without dealing with the JPFs at
all. This system mixted the Judean Asherah (mentioned in
sources from the first millennium BC) with archaeological
finds from periods as early as the Middle Bronze age.
Indeed, Pettey (1985:261) claimed that most of the "Asherah
objects" were Cana'anite and only few belonged to the Iron
Age II - a very strange conception. Kyle mentioned the
figurines simultaneously using every possible term (Astarte
figurines, heathen relics of gentiles, amulets in association
with superstitious beliefs), except the possibility that they
are part of a foreign cult of idols (since it is inconceivable
that Jews made idols). Kyle (1977:76) was obviously more
worried about the fact that "sometimes one is terrified to
think that ancient Palestinian people were as superstitious as
some modern Americans".
Many scholars followed Kenyon in relating horse-and-rider
figurines with a sun-eult. This may be important in relation
to the study of the JPFs, but I will not discuss it further here.
For some recent contributions on this subject see Taylor
1993; 1994; Worschech 1992). In my opinion, the most
precise and agreeable presentation of this subject was
offered in an unpublished dissertation by Holloway (1992:
501-509).
II.4.4. Hubner, Holladay and Wenning
These three scholars produced papers dealing with the JPFs
from varied viewpoints, which merit detailed discussion.
Hubner (1989) formed very wide generalizations from a
rather narrow data-base of only one JPF head, found on the
surface at Tel Malhata in the Negev. He suggested that the
JPFs had many functions. Basically they were objects of
popular religion, but in graves they relate to burial cult and
in houses to private piety (ibid:53 and n.53). The JPFs from
the pool at Gibeon were broken in an iconoclastic action
(ibid). Generally they may have represented female
goddesses and been venerated as goddesses. The fact that
they were meant to be seen from the front implies that they
were idols of Gods ("GiJ"tterbilder'').15 It is hard to identify
them with specific goddesses (ibid:54 and n.62), since the
figurines were really "power figures" ("Kraftbilder''), not
defined as specific goddesses. The figurines were among the
most common cult remains and therefore very significant,
since they shed clear light on the variety of religious levels
in Israel and on the close relation of Yahweh to Asherah:
"Gleichzeitig werden sie ein deutlich Licht auf die
Vielschichtligkeit der religiosen Verhaltnisse in einem
Israel, in dem fUr den einen Landes - und Hauptgott Yahwe
enge Beziehungen zur (s)einer '!rt bellegt sind". The
figurines represented goddesses, and therefore have been
banned by Yahwehism: "Die Verehrung Jahwes schloss
15 This reasoning I found hard to follow, or perhaps
misunderstood it.
19
weder die Benutzung weiblicher Terrakotten noch ihre
Verehrung bzw. die der sie reprasentierenden Gottheiten
aus" (Hubner 1989:54).
In a later article, Hubner (1992:123:fl) claimed that the
Asherah was venerated in the temple of Apollo-Hylates in
Kourion, since there was a circular structure with a sacred
grove and "poles" there. But it is necessary to state that the
date of this structure is late, and its meaning is open to
various explanations. Moreover, by this time HUbner (1992:
128-129) had identified Asherah with the JPFs as well as
with figurines of tambourine holders and motifs on seals.
Hubner's attitude is perhaps close to that of Dever (see chap.
11.4.7 below); but for both the basic problem is the same:
there is a lack of prooffor the identification of the JPFs with
the Asherah. In one case Hubner (1992: fig.2) mentioned a
unique figurine of the fourth century BC from Chitroi as
evidence for a cultic dance around an "Asherah pole". It is a
pity that he did not pay much attention to what Reed already
had to say about the same object in 1949:
"No inscription accompanies this scene, hence there is no
justification for calling the tree an Asherah, except as one
might call any representation of a tree an Asherah" (Reed
1949:4).
Surprisingly, in a book about games, Hiibner presented a
different picture, that the figurines represented both
goddesses and children's toys (1993:92-97, fig. 46). It is
almost impossible to separate these two functions, claimed
Hiibner, since the uses of a cultic object and a toy are
overlapping. One must question what the evidence is for the
use of the JPFs as toys? Hiibner has no shred of proof for
his theory, and the best he could manage was to bring in
anthropological or historical analogies for the use of
figurines as toys. This was done much earlier (cf. Ucko
1968), but cannot constitute a solution. 16
Totally different is Holladay's study (1987), a detailed
review of cult in Iron Age Israel and Judah from an
"explicitly archaeological" viewpoint. In the course of his
study, Holladay discussed different cult objects, including
stone altars, incense stands and clay figurines. His
archaeological review was given an ambitious theoretical
framework, the base of which lies the assumption that many
different levels existed within ancient religions. Holladay
separated an "established worship" from what he
unfortunately termed as "tolerated nonconformist worship".
This term is unfortunate because one immediately thinks
about underground, or forbidden cult. The "nonconformist"
cult was expressed in Jerusalem cave 1 and in Samaria locus
E.207 since, in opposition to "established" cult-sites, these
places were inconspicuous, found outside cities and included
many small figurines (Holladay 1987:267-270, 274-275). In
this way, Holladay related figurines with "nonconformist"
cult. Later he made a statistical analysis of cult objects from
16 Only one "toy" is mentioned from Iron Age Judah (ibid: 94 n.
10), and it is not a JPF. One must also note that the form of the
JPF head from Malhata is not typical to Judah, and it is perhaps
not a JPF but a plaque - figurine (see app. 2: 103).

four sites. His conclusions in regard to the figurines were
that they usually appeared in domestic quarters (ibid:276),
one in each house. They were related to small "house
shrines", but represented a goddess, and the only possible
identification was with Asherah (ibid:278). This
identification did not prevent Holladay from also calling the
figurines nurturing goddesses, suggesting that mainly
women indulged in this cult and defining the whole
phenomenon under the term "popular religion", e.g.,
something different than the official cult that, in his view,
was an-iconic (Holladay 1987:278-281).
The importance of Holladay's study is that it raised
questions and gave a contextual analysis, though not a very
thorough one and only for four sites. The conclusions were
perhaps too hastily reached, and the theoretical framework
is cumbersome; it seems to have been attached to the
evidence post factum. The separation of the two religious
levels is plausible in itself, but problematic in regard to the
figurines: why should these be termed "nonconformist", if
they are found in so many living houses? Although
Holladay referred to the important theoretical study of Voigt
(1983, cf. chap. 11.4.5 below), it seems that he did not apply
much of her work to his study.
Altogether different is the study of Wenning (1991), who
dealt only with JPFs from burials (this was a secondary
product of his larger research about burials). The custom of
putting JPFs in burials was not compulsory, since only 23 of
ca. 336 Judean burials contained JPFs (Wenning 1991:89).
Usually there was one JPF per family grave. Jerusalem cave
1 and Samaria E207 are not graves, and thus were not
discussed (ibid: 90, n.l). Some pillar-figurines were found
whole, thus probably the rest were not broken deliberately.
Wenning (1991:91) claimed that the Beth Shemesh burials
indicated that the JPFs were not icons, i.e., put in the grave
as venerated figures; nor were they votive objects, toys or
representations of human beings. The figurines represented
a nurturing goddess, with stress on nudity and sexuality, but
not fertility and birth (since the lower body is not portrayed).
They are, in his view, "Segensbild", which may be identified
with the Biblical Asherah.
An innovation by Wenning was the separation of the horse-
and-rider figurines into two types. The first was a sitting-
rider type which was, in his view, a human figure, while the
second was a standing-rider type, which represented a god.
This god has only pinched face, thus a full anthropomorphic
representation was avoided. Two figurines were found in
tomb 5 at Beth Shemesh, one JPF and one standing-rider
figurine, and Wenning claimed that the two were a god and
a goddess, perhaps a heavenly pair ("Gottes Paar").
However, at the last moment Wenning (1991:96-97)
declined from naming them with the specific names of
Asherah and Yahweh, and wrote that the god may also have
been a general sky- or sun-god ("Himmelsherr" or ~~).
Wenning's study is highly interesting, but very speculative.
He did not consult the main work on the JPFs (Wenning
1991:96 n.2), that is, the study by Holland (1975). Wenning
dismissed all the JPFs that were not from burials - yet these
20
form an overwhelming part of the data base. His main
conclusions are very problematic. What is the evidence that
the JPFs are goddesses and not magical artifacts or figures
of mortal beings? Why should the standing-rider figurines
designate a god? It is much more probable that the
difference in the types of the horse-and-rider figurines is
only stylistic: when a rider has a pillar-base, he cannot be
depicted as sitting! Furthermore, the standing riders held
the neck of the horse, unlike gods. Wenning claimed that
this was done only to support the riders during firing, and
that these supports (which are not real hands) were broken
on purpose after firing. This is a very unusual idea, which
does not seem likely. If fact, the riders hold reigns, and the
extension of the hands to the horse's neck is only a
convention of the potters (cf. Tatton-Brown and Crouwel
1992:291). Wenning also thought that the "bird" hand-
made heads were made in order to avoid full
anthropomorphic representation, thus suggesting that these
were not mortal beings but gods. Again, there is no proof for
such a theory (cf. a similar idea for Cypriote figurines,
Orphanides 1990:48, 50ff, but lacking evidence). Si~lar
hand-made heads are very common in the whole ancient
Near East, and it seems that they are only a simple, easy
(though schematic) way of portraying human heads.
Most speculative is Wenning's explanation of the two
figurines from Beth Shemesh tomb 5 as a heavenly pair: ~e
absurdity of this approach is best understood by accepting ~t
for a minute. If this was a heavenly pair, and the goddess IS
Asherah than surely the god must be Yahweh (in Judah).
But isn'tit surprising that only one pair was found in one
grave, among 336 graves known to Wenning, and 854 JPFs
known today? Were the Judeans so atheistic, that they
avoided putting representations of their main gods in their
burials? What is the evidence that the figurines from Beth
Shemesh tomb 5 constitute a pair? It is a family tomb, with
many burials over a period of a few generations at least.
There is no evidence at all that these two figurines were put
together, side by side. Furthermore, if the horse-and-rider is
the main male god, it is somewhat surprising that his figure
is smaller then the female Asherah figurines: usually, the
size is an indication of importance in ancient art, and it is
unlikely that the Asherah was more important than Yahweh
(for criticism cf. also Keel and Uehlinger 1992:392).
11.4.5. Theoretical Studies and the work of
, also figurines used for initiation rites and even children's
M. Voigt (1983)
Some studies about figurines are important to us for their
theoretical value (cf. the work of Ucko, mentioned earlier),
even though they do not deal directly with the JPFs. ~or
example Fowler (1985:343) claimed that not every figurine
was a g~ddess, thus the places where fi~nes were !ound
were not necessarily cultic places. To Illustrate this, he
provided evidence of figurines functioning as toys or
magical objects. Fowler (1985:335) cautioned. that "the
truth is we simply do not know what these figurines were,
nor, for that matter, what purpose they might have served."
His conclusion was similar: "archaeology has not thrown
light whatever [sic] upon the purpose and function of any
Palestinian figurine supposedly of a deity, nor has it Many other studies of figurines can contribute to our
demonstrated beyond doubt the latter's identity" (ibid:343). understanding, even when dealing with Minoan, Cypriot or
There is truth in this, but the conclusion that figurines are Bengali figurines (e.g., Pilali-Papasteriou 1989; Carless-
not necessarily sacred is not very new. Hulin 1989; Bhattacharya 1989).18. Theoretical studies of
symbols and iconography may also be useful (Skorupski
A highly important study was made by Voigt (1983) in 1976:116-124; Morris 1987:218-234; Kippenberg 1985-6;
regard to prehistoric figurines from the site of Hajj Firuz Gudison 1989; Carless-Hulin 1989; Duff, Clark and
Tepe in Iran, and it merits a careful review. Voigt classified Chadderdon 1992). However, the explanation of visual
the functions of small figurines, which are known from forms as a symbolic system is possible only when there is
ethnographic sources, as follows: enough "external evidence", i.e., historical or ethnographic
sources, to help to break the symbolic code (Kippenberg
1. Cult figures, representing supernatural entities, usually as 1985-6:vii; for a theoretical study of archaeology and cult cf.
their symbols or cultic objects. Renfrew 1985; also Garwood et.al. 1991; on fertility cult in
2. Magic vehicles, related with rituals of fertility, birth, the Mediterranean see Bonnano 1986).19
protection from evil spirits, damaging enemies etc. Voigt
warned (1983: 186 and n.l) that magic and religion cannot
be separated clearly, and that it is wrong to create a 11.4.6. The Archaeological Approach of
dichotomy between the religious and the "secular" domains.
3. Didactic or educational figures, for teaching values or W. G. Dever
sexual facts during initiation rites and other ceremonies.
In an early book, Paul and Dever (1977:267-271) barely
4. Children's toys, used for amusement.
mentioned the small anthropological figurines ("images"),
5. Representation of deceased people, people related to the
and did not relate them at all to the Asherah. But following
deceased and animals, which served as burial furniture
the discovery of the inscriptions from Kh. el-Kom and
(Voigt 1983:186). Burials had not been discovered in Hajj
Kuntillet 'Ajrud, Dever became one of the "Asherah priests"
Firuz Tepe, so Voigt did not discuss this category.
and an opposite pole to the negative opinions of Fowler
(chap. 11.4.5 above). For Dever, archaeology is omnipotent
The use of figurines from categories 1-2 is well known from
and the key to solving Biblical issues. Archaeology, in his
Mesopotamia. Categories 3-4 are known only from modern
view, proves that there was an Asherah cult in Israel, sinc~
ethnographic evidence, but were probably used in ancient
the figure playing the lyre in the Kuntillet 'Ajrud pithoi
times as well (Voigt 19lB~187). Voigt surveyed-the work of
drawings is the Asherah (Dever 1982:38f;. 1984:23-24).
Ucko (1968), and outlined the difficulty in distinguishing
The coiffure of this figure is identical-to that of the Syro-
between the categories of function in cases where there are
Palestinian Astarte figurines of the 9th-8th centuries BC
no written sources relating to ancient figurines. She
(Dever 1982:3~). The last are "no doubt" a representation of
suggested that some attributes might help to determine the
the mother-goddess, thus the coiffure is a proof that we are
function of a figurine, among them are patterns and degrees
dealing with a religious scene - and with a goddess.
of wear, points of damage, breakage patterns, evidence of
I
burning, disposal patterns, types of archaeological contexts,
Dever (1982:39) claimed that Asherah was related also to
and relations to other artifacts (Voigt 1983:191-193). Figure
artifacts representing a women on a horse, and that she was
1 (below) shows the attributes according to categories of
a mixed Cana'anite goddess: Asherah-Anat-Astarte. The
function, as suggested by Voigt (1983: table 29).
merging of the goddesses was taken from former studies:
Of course, the difficulties of defining the function of a "Albright, Cross, Stadel mann and many other commentators
figurine are enormous. This is obvious if a list of clear,
have long since pointed out an extraordinary, almost
different attributions between the categories of function is
bewildering fluidity in the conception of many Northwestern
made: there are very few clear cut attributes.l? For
Semitic deities, seen in the overlap in their roles, their
example, figurines which show exaggerated sexual attributes
tendency to coalesce and split off, and even their ability to
might represent fertility goddesses or ritual vehicles, but
combine opposites" (Dever 1984:28).
toys (Voigt 1983:189). Similar forms may be used for
various functions in the same society (ibid: 191).
18 For example, Bhattacharya (1989) dealt with the cult of the
snake Goddess Manasha. This cult changes from area to area, and
The discussion of Voigt is remarkable. Although she was
may lack an iconic figure of the goddess itself. Votive figurines of
not able to suggest clear answers for many problems, she has
horses and elephants may be used. It seems that in this case an
made a significant contribution by raising issues and by
being conscious of the implied difficulties. It is a wonder
iconographic, or stylistic analyses would hardly have helped to find
the connection between these figurines and the snake goddess
that Voigt's study has not been used thoroughly in regard to
(known from written sources and ethnographic evidence).
the research of the JPFs, despite its importance.
19 If the figurines represented gods, questions about the Israelite
Monotheism and the Biblical ban of idols are likely to rise. On
17 If one takes table 28 of Voigt and removes the similar attributes these subjects see Haag 1985; Dohmen 1985; Lemche 1992;
between the categories, very few differences would be left. Mettinger 1994; Dietrich 1994.
21
Dever probably paid no attention to what Reed (1949:4)
had to say about such methods of study: "It is apparent
that the pictographic material relating with the subject of
the Asherah can be helpful only after the nature and the
function of the word have been established by a critical
study of the epigraphic and literary evidence available".
Asherah is also understood by Dever as part of popular
religion, and as syncretism; this is supposedly documented
by archaeology, which gives a realistic and balanced
picture of religion in ancient Israel (Dever 1982:39).
Asherah was a mother-goddess in the 8th-7th centuries
BC, while earlier she was related with the cult of the
"Lion-Lady". Her function as a goddess was proved by the
large number of Israelite fertility figurines: "Hundreds of
female terracottas of the so-called "Astarte" (more
accurately, "Asherah") type have been found, mostly
Judean pillar-base figurines" (Dever 1983:573). The
figurines were not just the goddess Asherah, but
functioned as talismans to aid conception and childbirth.
We "desperately need a current and systematic treatment
of all the data on Late Bronze and Iron Age figurines,"
stated Dever (1983:579, n. 11; cf. Dever 1982:40). One
should remember, though, that only a few years had
passed since Holland's extensive Ph.D., which was
probably not consulted in detail by Dever.
Dever (1990) was even more resolved in his popular book,
where chapter four is titled "Archaeology reconstructs the
lost background of the Israelite cult". On the one hand,
"in Israelite agricultural villages, the modeling of
common farm animals in clay was probably a natural
impulse [sic], so not all of the zoomorphic figurines need
be interpreted culticully" (Dever 1990:157).20 On the
other hand, the anthropomorphic Iron Age figurines
represented a "dea nutrix", similar to the former Bronze
Age plaque figurines.-! they adopted motifs from the
Cana'anite cult of a mother-goddess. They were not
something forbidden, because they may have been used in
conception, birth and breast-feeding rituals. In opposition
to this, we do not find male figurines, according to the
Biblical second commandment. Through a new kind of
mathematics, Dever somehow discovered thousands of
pillar figurines:
"Thousands of these terra-cottas have been found at
Israelite sites" (1990: 157); "...the pillar base, or so-called
Astarte figurines ...that are prevalent throughout Israel and
Judah... As many as 3,000 or more are now known, some
2,000 from Jerusalem alone ..." (1994:121).
20 This is just a smallexample of carelessness. Why "villages"?
Are Jerusalem, Tell e-Nasbeh or Lachish, where many JPFs and
animal figurines were found, villages? Furthermore, what
exactly is a "natural impulse", and why must such a "natural
impulse" be associated with a non-cultic figurine?
21 Indeed, the sameexplanation was suggested for bothkinds of
figurines (Dever1987:2261).
22
According to the Kuntillet- 'Ajrud inscriptions, Dever had
no hesitation in identifying the figurines as Asherah-
figurines, but because of so-called overlapping between
the all Cana'anite goddesses, the figurines could have
represented Anat and Astarte at the same time. Dever
rejected, though, the attribution of the Jerusalem cave 1
figurines to heathens only, and suggested that: "it is
tempting to see in these figurines dramatic evidence of the
background of reforms such as that of king Josiah" (Dever
1990:159).
In the following publications, the tone became even more
boastful. It seems that Dever had convinced himself
completely. Asherah was related by him to almost
everything, from the Ta'anakh cult stand, to doves, to
plaque figurines of playing women, to the lyre player of
Kuntillet 'Ajrud. There were hundreds of Asherah
figurines in small household shrines already during the
Iron Age I period (Dever 1991:110f, 112). Asherah is
called the great Cana'anite mother-goddess, and all the
goddesses are the same: Anat, Asherah, Astarte, Elat,
Kudshu (Dever 1994:121f). For Dever (1994:122),
"There is simply no way around it: these are Asherah
figurines".
Above all, Dever even suggested that the small bronze
lion found at Arad is, "no doubt, an Asherah symbol"
(1994:109; cf. 1991:111). Unfortunately, this artifact is
not a figurine but an Assyrian type of scale-weight, well
known from Assyria (and from other regions). This was
noted by Bron and Lemaire (1983:765, n. 20), followed by
many scholars (Holladay 1987:257, and table 2; Rose
1975:192; Barkay 1990:190; KIetter 1991:132). This
artifact has no obvious relation to the Asherah (cf. Rose
1975:189), there is nothing else which is surely related
with the Asherah in the temple of Arad, and we do not
know the circumstances in which this weight reached the
temple. Obviously, it is necessary to refer the readers, and
Dever, once again to the appropriate warnings of Reed
(1949, cf. 11.3.2 above).
Dever's attitude creates a confused mixture, which
includes every possible term and definition for the
figurines at the same time: mother-goddess, nurturing-
goddess, lion-lady, Asherah (which is also Anat-Astarte-
Elat-and Kudshu), a phenomenon of popular religion, and
fertility cult (against pasting such attributions to Asherah
see Wiggins 1991:383). This way, the Aherah becomes a
complete "mischwesen, " which can include practically
everything. Once Dever used the pillar figurines in order
to explain the figure on the Kuntilled 'Ajrud pithoi
(argued by the similarity of the coiffure and pre-supposing
that the figurines represented goddesses); but later the
figurines were explained by the Kuntillet 'Ajrud figure (cf.
Dever 1982:38 vs. Dever 1990:157-159). A much more
careful attitude to the Kuntillet 'Ajrud material is needed
(see Beck 1982; also Hadley 1994:274f). The
identification of the figurines with Asherah was suggested
much earlier, and much more clearly (Engle, Patai and
others, see above). Perhaps this identification "is correct,
but Dever fails to provide the evidence.
11.4.7. The "Iconographic School":
Winter, Keel and Uehlinger
I have grouped together in this section a line of studies,
which stress iconography as the main theme. The large-
scale work ofUrs Winter (1983) about the iconography of
women and goddesses in the ancient Near East is
prominent among these studies. This book actually
focuses on understanding the Old Testament material, and
it is a common approach for many of the iconographic
studies. Often, they do not aim at explaining iconographic
1 material per se, but discuss it in order to solve Biblical, or
theological, problems.
Winter (1983:93-134) reviewed the appearances of a
"naked goddess" on cylinders seals (I will not deal with
these) and figurines. He (1983:95) believed that figurines
usually represented goddesses: "meine vermutung geht...
dass es sich in der Mehrzahl den Fiille um Gottinen
handelt". The main types of figurines were classified by
the position of their arms (Winter 1983:96-97). The pillar
type was seen as common to the land of Israel during the
lOth-6th centuries, but especially during the 8th-7th
centuries BC (ibid:107-109). Its origin lies perhaps in
Cyprus, but it is actually a unique Palestinian type
(ibid:124). The moulds may have been foreign
(phoenician? - ibid:127). Winter claimed that the
figurines were related to women: "Ohne weiteres darf
man annehmen, das diese vor allem fUr die hier lebenden
Frauen eine besondere Function gehabt haben miissen"
(Winter 1983:127). This is not very convincing: what is
the evidence that relates the figurines with female burials
("Frauengra"bem")? Every tomb contained mass-burials,
and there is no such evidence, unfortunately.
Winter rejected the general explanations of mother-
goddesses or fertility-figurines, since a more precise
definition is possible. Following the excavators of Tel en-
Nasbeh, where figurines were found in domestic
buildings, Winter (1983: 131) suggested that they were
domestic icons or amulets, that helped to make the
atmosphere of the house erotic. In other cases, figurines
were given to a temple as ex voto, or were burial gifts to
ensure female magic (ibid: BOt). The figurines belonged
to popular religion, but were not opposed to the official
religion: "Fiir den Kontext der israelitischen Religion ist
wichtig, dass solche Figiirchen, die ihren 'Sitz im Leben'
in der Privatfrdmmigkeit hatten, den offizielen JHWH-
Kult nicht zum vomeherein getahrdeten" (Winter
1983:131t).
Winter found the proof that the JPFs were goddesses in
the figure of the naked goddess on Syrian cylinder-seals,
despite the differences in time, materials and geographical
areas:
"...es sich bei den Figiirchen um aus der
Privatfrdmmigkeit erwachsene Gotterdarstellungen
handelt. Das wird durch die Siegel bestatigt" (Winter
1983:192, cf. ibid: 134).
The figure on the seals is a goddess, since she sometimes
appears with a horned cap, or standing on animals, or
"-
accompanied by wings and a god (though these attributes
are known from a small percentage of the naked goddess
seals). Winter concluded that the figurines represented
not toys, but a goddess, that originated in private religion.
Even if a few figurines represented playing, or praying
women, these were exceptions (Winter 1983:192t). It is
impossible to identify the goddess, but Winter called her
"the Syrian goddess" - a central goddess in the pantheon,
paredos to Hadad and Amurru, a defending, praying and
inter-mediating goddess (Winter 1983:193-196). She was
also a sky goddess, whose nakedness symbolized female
power.22
The importance of Winter's study lies in its wide
background, but this is also its major deficiency (as
criticized already by Lipinski 1986; Van den-Toom
1986). Can we compare phenomena that are so different?
Winter compiled second millennium seals from Syria with
figurines and written evidence from first millennium BC
Israel. He took the whole Near East as one unified,
cultural entity. However, not all the figurines are
necessarily goddesses and their mixing into a "Syrian
goddess" is problematic. There is a strong opposite view,
which calls for the use of inner, contemporaneous
evidence only, rather than making analogies to other
places, times and cultures (Renfrew 1985; Carless-Hulin
1989:95. Against the theory of the naked goddess see
Bretschneider 1991:24; also Wiggins 1991). Regarding
the JPFs specifically, Winter made no new discoveries and
relied on rather old literature. He did not use Holland's
thesis, and referred very briefly to Engle (Winter 1983:97,
108 n.68).
Keel and Uehlinger (1992) took the iconographic theory
to its extreme. Keel formulated the main principles much
earlier (Keel 1972). The study of the OT had exhausted
itself and reached a dead end, it being dependent on
problematic OT sources: "Da die biblischen Texte immer
dieselben bleiben... entartet die Diskussion manchmal zur
repetition von Hingst Geschriebenem, von
Schulmeinungen und Pauschalthesen" (Keel and
Uehlinger 1992:,0). The study of iconography was
neglected, but it could produce a rich source of
information. Iconography is superior to written sources,
because it is authentic and immediately yielding:
"Iconography compels us to see through the eyes of the
ancient Near East" (Keel 1972:8; cf. Keel and Uehlinger
1992:,0). This is problematic, since there is no direct,
"innocent eye" and the beholder's part is always crucial:
"what we see depends on our interpretation" (Wittgenstein
quoted in: Kippenberg 1985-6:vii). From the very
beginning, the aim of Keel was not an iconographic study
per-se, but to enlighten OT and historical sources through
iconographic studies. Keel's school of thought has
22 Regarding the Biblical Asherah, Winter took her to be a
goddess who was suppressed by Yahwehism and later re-
installed (for more references aboutthe Asherah, see chapter X
below).

~;wuable;Lwill
only; on-aspeetswmch are relevant to the
pillarfigurines, discussed in detail in a recent monograph
by Keel and Uehlinger (1992). The line of argument of
Keel and Uehlinger was as follows:
A. Dove figurines of Iron Age II in Palestine indicate an
attribute of "the goddess" (meaning a goddesses in a
sense of "the mother goddess", or "the naked goddess" of
Urs Winter).
B. The evidence for A is that dove-figurines were found in
the Middle Bronze Age temples of Nahariya and
Megiddo. These doves figurines represented "the
messengers of love between the god and the goddess".
C. The evidence for the last interpretation was described
in an earlier work (Keel 1977:143-168): in some ancient
Syrian seals there is a scene of a dove between a god and a
goddess (cf. Keel and Uehlinger 1992:36, 370). In this
way, Iron Age dove figurines were related to Middle
Bronze age figurines, and then to Syrian cylinder seals,
though, claimed Keel and Uehlinger (1992:26, 370), the
dove figurines were not found together with the female
pillar figurines of the goddess, and thus the dove figurines
were only attributes or substitutes for the goddess.
Regarding the pillar figurines, Keel and Uehlinger did not
consult the thesis of Holland (Keel and Uehlinger 1992:
n.388) but called for a new catalogue: "Die Publikation
eines Katalogs aller Belege ist ein dringendes Desiderat"
(ibid:374). Reflecting on the scarcity of the moulds, they
suggested that these were used in extra-mural potter's
workshops (ibid:372374; against see evidence for
workshops in Wood.1990:33f, fig. 16). They believed that
the heads were imported and only the bodies made locally
at each site (following Albright). They also claimed that
heads were used separately as whole artifacts (ibid:374),
but this claim is baseless.P Keel and Uehlinger dated the
figurines from the end of the 8th to the 7th century BC,
but included figurines from Northern Israel within the
corpus. Only one figurine was used at each house or burial
(1992:376). Therefore, these were household icons,
related to private, or family, religion - but not to a popular
religion of the lower social strata only (ibid, and n. 345).
There is a time gap between the PFs and the earlier plaque
figurines, thus the origins of the PFs lies elsewhere,
perhaps in Assyria or Phoenicia (ibid:376, but without
corroborating evidence).
The identification of the PFs was strengthened by a
scaraboid seal from Lachish (Keel and Uehlinger
1992:376378, fig. 323). Keel and Uehlinger were not
worried about the fact that this seal was unstratified and
had no other comparison among Hebrew Iron Age seals
23 The only evidence for this was one head with a suspension
(?) hole from Hazor. This is an exception, and furthermore, does
not belong to the Judean figurines.
24
anu . stamps. They ""tbought that the seal portrayed a
goddes$beside a branch, thus being the "vegetation
goddess" which continues the Middle Bronze Age
traditions. A limestone statuette from Megiddo, or
Ammonite statues, are mixed up in the discussion without
any reserve. The full breasts of the pillar figurines implied
an aspect of a nurturing goddess (Keel and Uehlinger
1992:380). This is further proved by the woman and
child figurine from Tel Beth Mirsim (ibid:381; here app.
2:232.).24
Keel and Uehlinger (1992: #195) saw the pillar figurines
as a representation of Asherah. That they were goddesses
was concluded from the identification of dove figurines
with a goddess (see above). It was Asherah, because in
Iron Age Judah she was the only possible candidate. The
figurines are not Asherim, which were cult objects in
temples. The figurines were part of a general tendency
towards iconic representation in the 7th century, versus an
earlier an-iconism (1992:384f; but cf. the Hebrew seals,
mostly of the 7th century, which are an-iconic: Sass
1993). In other areas, the pillar figurines are Astartes
(1992:385).
A detailed criticism of the methods of Keel and Uehlinger
deserves a whole monograph (cf. Weippert, H. 1994;
Caquot 1994). In regard to the JPFs, there are many
limitations in their theory, some of which have already
been mentioned above (I will discuss further limitations in
the following chapters). The work of Schroer also belongs
to the iconographic school, but she accepted Winter's
conclusions about the JPFs and discussed them very
briefly (1987: 45 n.120; 343f n.189; 387 n.170). Schroer
thought that the Old Testament term "om7N" (god)
encompassed all human and animal representations,
including the small clay figurines: "Unter die
Pauschalbezeichnung om~:1N nicht nur plastische
Darstellungen mannlicher Gottheiten, sondern z.B. auch
all die weiblichen Terrakottafiguren, die bei ausgrabungen
in Israel/Palastina in so engen Mengen gefunden wurden,
fallen" (Schroer 1987:343fand n.189-190).
II.4.8. Other Figurines and the Neighboring
Areas
At present we have quite a large quantity of data about
different types of clay figurines, which were found in
areas neighboring Judah. This situation did not exist 20
or 30 years ago, so that now we are in a better position to
judge possible comparisons, or differences between these
figurines and the JPFs.
Transjordan. We have a D.Phil. by Amr (1980), but it
is a very problematic study. Otherwise, our knowledge is
24 Despite the fact that this figure has no female breasts at all,
and the child is carried on its back.
still limited (lsserlin 1976; Dornemann 1983:129-137;
Beck 1995; Bienkowski 1991b).25
Phoenicia. Figurines are now better known through
excavations at Sarepta (pritchard 1988:31-71), Tel Keisan
(Keisan 1:331-335) and Achzib (partly unpublished). We
also have many collections and a few syntheses (Culican
1969; 1975~; Ganzman et. al. 1987; Gubel 1982; 1986;
1991; in general see Ward 1994).
Philistia. There have been important new excavations in.
the southern coastal plain, at Tel Shera, Tel Harer,
Rukeish, Ekron, Ashkelon, etc. Their publication will no
doubt enhance our -understanding greatly. (for 'some
preliminary reports see Oren'1986; 1991; 1993; Dothan'
and Gitin 1987; Gitin 1989; 1993; 19'95).
Cyprus. Cyprus is the richest area in regard to clay
figurines (also large clay statues). There is a wide range of
studies on Cypriot figurines, pottery workshops and
relations with other areas (Beer 1991; Bisi 1979; 1989;
1991; Carless-Hulin 1989; 1989b; Caubet 1991; 1992;
Connely 1989; Karageorghis 1977; 1987; Meerschaert
1991; Sophocleous 1985; S~rensen 1991; Vandenabeele
1986; Yon and Caubet 1988; Uhlenbrock 1993). There
are interesting assemblages of figurines in Cyprus already
in the Chalcolithic period (Goring 1991; A-Campo 1994).
A very extensive work is being made by Karageorghis
(1993; 1993; 1994; unfortunately, the volume about Smal
figurines of the 7th-6th centuries BC is currently i
press).
The Aegean world and Greece. Varied and rich
literature exists on figurines from this area (Ammerman
1991; Haag 1981; Higgins 1969; Nicholls 1952; 1970;
Pilali-Papasteriou 1989; Price 1978; Romano 1988). The
publication of the Philakopy Temple is important from a
theoretical point of view (Renfrew 1985:1-25, 417419).
For naked female figurines there is now a new monograph
by Bohm (1990; for review see Hermary 1992). A very
interesting work deals with the placing of small figurines
in Greek temples and their relation with the large cult
statues (Alroth 1988; 1989; cf. Van-Straten 1992).
Syria - Mesopotamia. There is also a very rich source
for small figurines here (Badre 1980; Barrelet 1968;
Blocher 1987; Geller 1989; Colbow 1991; Spycket 1992).
For us, the literature about the magical use bt figurines in
this area is important (Black and Green 1992; Green
1983; 1994; Wiggermann 1992; discussed in chap. IX
below).
Egypt. Egyptian figurines are known mainly from
graves (Noblecourt 1953), but also from. houses and
Temples. The assemblage at the Gebel el-Zeit temple is.,
especially interesting (Gamer-Wallert , 1992; Wilford
1993; Pinch 1983; 1993:198-226). Highly important is
25 For the general history of Transjordan in the Iron Age II see
Barnett 1989; Bienkowski 1991; Weippert 1987; Dicou 1994;
Worschech 1990b; Herr 1993.
new work on magic in Egypt (Ritner 1992; 1993; cf. chap.
IX below).
From all these areas, figurines are found that are either
contemporary or earlier than the JPFs. Some later
figurines are important to us because of implied
theoretical aspects. Figurines from various periods can be
used for analogies, or for the study of the origin and
continuation of motifs. For Example, the Late Bronze age
plaque-figurines (Ben Arieh 1983; Beck 1986; Conrad
1985; Tadmor, M. 1982), or the Persian period figurines
(Stern 1973:159-181; Linder 1986; Stern 1989).
II.4.9. Gender and Feminist Approaches
In the last twenty years or so, the impact of feminism and
gender studies has been growing in the field of Old
Testament studies, and hence in relation to the Asherah -
and to the pillar figurines.P' Carol Meyers wanted to use
the figurines to help reconstruct female participation in
the religious life, since in her view they show a
connection between women and household cult (1988:
161). Meyers was skeptic about the identification of the
figurines as goddesses (then they may have been used also
by men); but if they represented mortal women or
motherhood symbols, then they are part of women's lives
" (ibid:162). The pillar figurines stressed motherhood but
not sexuality, thus they were perhaps votive objects, which
.1 encouraged fertility. They cannot be identified with a
specific goddess (ibid:162-3). The figurines represented
religious feelings; especially female religious life. This
shows that women had a place in domestic religion,
furthermore, domestic cult is impossible without women.
This analysis shares with some other feminist studies the
wish to "beautify" the dominantly male picture of the Old
Testament (for an opposite feminist direction see
Goldenberg 1979).
Often, the feminist literature takes it for granted that the
pillar figurines represented Asherah, other goddesses or
teraphim (TeubalI984:91-93; for the teraphim see Loretz
1992), and that they were related specifically to women
(for which there is no decisive archaeological proof). For
example, Gadon (1989: 172ff, fig.96) sawall figurines as
goddesses and pillar figurines as Asherah, which testifies
to the existence of a very important Hebrew goddess.
Often, the archaeological contribution of these studies is
limited, as they tend to adopt archaeological knowledge
second hand.
Studies of gender can be important from a theoretical
point of view, by suggesting new insights into subjects
such as the physical place and gender (Ardener 1993, and
esp. the study of Hirschon there), or dress and gender
a 26 For general feminist studies of the Bible see Harris 1984;
Bird 1987; Day, P.L. 1989; Hackett 1987. Cf. also Goldenberg
1979. Unavailable to me at the moment is a study by Rosemary
Ruether (1974. Religion and sexism - hnages of Women in the
Jewish and Christian Traditions. NY).
25
roles (Barnes and Eicher 1992). Of course, there are also
popular feminist studies. One very dubious example is a
book about the Egyptian Hagar, not worthy of comment
(Teubal 1990). In another study, the figurines are termed
widely as "a burst of popular piety", "a visual metaphor"
and "a kind of tangible prayer for fertility and
nourishment" (Frymer-Kensky 1992: 158ft). These terms
only obscure the subject. It must be stressed that
publications of this sort are common everywhere and are
not an invention of feminist circles.
IT.4.tO. The Theme of Popular Religion
In the last ten years the theme of popular-, common- or
folk-religion became widespread in regard to the pillar
figurines (e.g., Holladay 1987, chap. 11.4.3 above). A good
basis for discussing this subject is found in a volume of
studies edited by Vrijhof and Waardenburg (1979). The
first thing one must note is the lack of agreement as to
what exactly is "common religion". The editors used this
definition:
"If by official religion we mean beliefs and practices
which are prescribed, regulated and socialized by
specialized religious institutions, then common religion
can be described as those beliefs and practices of an
overtly religious nature, which are not under the
domination of a prevailing religious institute" (Vrijhof
and Waardenburg 1979:2,668).
This is, of course, a negatively based definition. The
scholars who took part in the book could not agree about
the definition (ibid:669-671, 672-674). Many of them
noted that there are close ties between official and
common religions, and these should not be viewed as
independent, and necessarily opposed phenomena, The
terms "official religion" and "common religion" are
stamped by doctrinal, institutional religion in general, and
Christianity in particular. They are less practical with
half-doctrinized religions (Hinduism or Buddhism), and
may be totally inadequate with other religions (e.g.,
agrarian pre-literate African religions, ibid:674).
Sadek suggested simpler and also positive definitions in
regard to ancient Egypt (1988:1-2). National religion was
the religion practiced in temples, in the name of the
King, by a body of professional priests and clerics. It was
a religion for the people and on their behalf, but not
practiced by them. Common religion included beliefs and
customs of the Egyptian people outside the official royal
temples, but was not a religion of the poor only. Both had
been but different forms of the same basic religion, and
not different religions (Sadek 1988:2, 294),27 Is the
analysis of Sadek valid for ancient Judah?
The connection between pillar-figurines and common
religion is not new (see already Pilz 1924:161; Holladay
27 For expressions of common religion in the workmen's village
at Deir el Medina, see Tosi 1988.
26
1987:281; Jerusalem 11:49, 127). Wright related PF with
the common folks (1957:117). The use of the term
common religion did not prevent the description of the
figurines in any other way, from goddesses to magic
objects and mortal female-figures. It is important to avoid
defining common religion as something which is
forbidden or has exceptional norms, or is a phenomenon
of the lower levels of society only.
Common religion is also not a new subject in OT studies
(e.g., Albertz 1978; Segal 1976). A comprehensive
bibliographical list is reviewed by Berlinerblau (1993),
who also defined popular religious groups in a negative
way: "any association of individuals living within the
borders of ancient Israel, who by dint of their religious
beliefs, political beliefs, rituals, symbols and so on, are
denigrated by the authors of the Old Testament"
(1993:18).
Recently, Ackerman (1992) tried to explore common
religion in sixth century BC Judah, from a few rather
difficult prophetic verses in the OT (for a short review cf.
Mulder 1994). Ackerman's definition of common religion
is, again, negative: "it is not the religion that is usually
presented to us as normative in the Bible. More
specifically, it is not the religion of the Deuteronomistic
school, the priests, or the prophets" (Ackerman 1992:ix).
M. Rose dealt with the pillar-figurines in relation to
popular religion in Judah and Israel. Following a short
description, he accepted the identification of the pillar-
figurines with Ashera as plausible, though not proven
(1975:183). Rose did not differentiate between pillar
figurines in Judah and other regions, and defined them as
cult objects of the Israelite cult. They appear throughout
the Iron Age II period, thus are not restricted to a specific
period when only Yahweh was worshipped (Rose
1975:185). Rose was in favour of seeing these figurines
as part of a popular religion (not "foreign"), perhaps
mainly of women who were not satisfied by the official
Yahweh-cult:
"Diese Aschera-Statuetten waren Bestandteil des
'Bodensatzes' der Volksfrdmmigkeit, vielleicht waren sie
Eigentum der Frauen in Israel/Judah, deren BedUIfnisse
der Yahwe-Kult der offiziellen Welt vielleicht nicht
befriedigte" (Rose 1975:186).
Rose (1975:186) noticed that these figurines were found at
the Palace of Ramat Rabel, and thus were not related only
to low, uneducated levels of society. Furthermore, he
noticed the lack of figurines in the temple of Arad, which
was clearly an official temple of Yahweh. This casts
doubts on the theory that Asherah was Yahweh's paredos:
"Ware Aschera Jahwes "inevitable, necessary
counterpart", so harte man ihre Prasentz in den Gestalt
der weiblichen Pfeilerfigiirchen unter den frommen
Jahwe-Verehren Arads erwarten kdnnen. Nichts aber
dergleichen konnte fUr Arad beobachtet werden (Rose
1975:192). The perception shown by Rose (1975) is all
the more impressive, when it is compared with all the
later articles of Dever.
Another interesting study was made by Vorlander (1986).
His definition of popular religion is as follows: "the term
'popular religion' refers to the popular ideas entertained by
the Israelite concerning God's action in the life of the
individual, the community, and in nature" (1986:63).
This popular religion existed side by side with the worship
of Yahweh. It included belief in demons and concerned
practical methods of encouraging God's assistance and not
theological interest in God itself (Vorlander 1986:65f,
69). Vorlander (ibid:67) saw the figurines as
representations of divinities. The popular religion of Israel
was criticized sharply by the Prophets (ibid:68f), but only
the Exile caused a decisive break, when Yahweh became a
close, personal god.
A few scholars have warned against a simplified
understanding of common religion in regard to the JPFs
(Ahlstrom 1982:83f; 1984; Keel and Uehlinger 1992:
n.345; Rose 1975).28 The study of Vorlander is
interesting, and many points may be accepted (or denied).
Yet, it seems that in a way Vorlander, and other scholars,
run the risk of substituting the "good old" Frazerian
conception of magic, with what they call popular religion.
Is this just "the same lady in a different dress"?
IT.4.11. The Inscriptions ofKh. el-Kom and
Kuntillet 'Ajrud '
I will briefly describe these inscriptions and drawings,
since they are of a crucial importance to the
understanding of the Biblical Asherah.
A blessing inscription was found in a grave at Kh. el-
Kom, which includes the following Hebrew sentence:
"nrn\!lN~1 '"l~) mn 1m"lN 1"l:1" ("May Uriyahu be blessed
by Yahweh my guardian and by his Asherah" - reading by
Naveh 1979; but cr. Lemaire 1977). Since then, the
inscription has been treated by many scholars (e.g.,
Mittman 1981; Schroer 1983; Zevit 1984; Dever 1984; .
Hadley 1987; O'Conner 1987; Shea 1990; Hadley
1994:242ft).
Phitoi with inscriptions and drawings were found at
Kuntillet 'Ajrud, a site from the 8th century BC on the
border of the Negev and Sinai (for the archaeology of the
site see Ayalon 1985; Gunneweg et. al. 1985; Hadley
1993; Meshel 1994). One of the pithoi (B) carried the
drawing of a sitting women playing a lyre, and two
standing figures (of Bes? - see Beck 1982: fig.5). An
inscription was written above the drawings, which
included the sentence: "nn"l\!lN~' n~\!l mm~ o:mN rrru"
28 Ahlstrom (1982:26) suggested an unusual opposition;
common religion as village ritual, versus the official, national
religion in cities, as if a sharp line separated the religion of
cities from that of villages. On "common Yahwehism", but
without connection to the JPFs, see also 01yan 1985:108.
27
("I bless you by Yahweh, our guardian and by his
Asherah", again the reading of Naveh 1979). Scholars
debated about the word Shomeron. It could mean the city
Samaria or the whole area of Samaria; or perhaps the
word comes from the vern "guard" in the meaning of
"Yahweh is our guardian". Another debate concerned the
ending of the word Asheratah. In correct ancient Hebrew,
this ending is impossible if the word means the private
name of a goddess. Another mention of Asheratah was
found on pithos A. These finds have been the subject of an
overwhelming number of discussions (Gilula 1976; Beck
1982; Emerton 1982; Dever 1984; North 1989; Dietrich
and Loretz 1992: chapter 3.3; Hadley 1993; 1994:425-
429; Lemaire 1994:148f - to name only a few). Recently,
the word Asherah appeared also in an inscription "kd~
l'rrt" from Ekron (Smith 1994:200; Gitin 1995:72).
The finds from Kuntillet 'Ajrud and Kh. el-Kom brought
up the question of the place of Asherah in Israelite and
Judean religion. Was she a great goddess and a mate to
Yahweh? What is the relation between the inscriptions
and the drawings (Beck 1982)? I will return to these
questions in the concluding chapter.
11.5. Summary
In this chapter, I have reviewed the development of
research in a chronological order. Throughout the last
hundred years, most of the scholars explained the JPFs in
one of the four following ways: I. As toys. 2. Mortal
human beings (both these explanations are rather rare).
3. Magical artifacts. 4. Cultic artifacts, related with
goddesses, either representations of a goddess herself, or
its attribute, or votive objects. Voigt's (1983) fifth
category, related to burials, can be safely ruled out because
only a minority of the JPFs were found in burials. In the
last years there has been a growing tendency to identify
the JPFs with the biblical Asherah. Recently, Dietrich
and Loretz (1992) discussed cult statues in Mesopotamia
in relation to the Old Testament. The authors deliberately
refrain from discussing the pillar-figurines; it seemed to
them that archaeologists had hopelessly mixed
philological and historic arguments while dealing with the
figurines:
"Auf diese Weise sind nicht nur Mischargumentationen
entstanden, die mehrfach mit Zirkelschlussen durchsetzt
sind, sondern auch archaologische Argumentations-
modelle, in einigen Fallen zu philologisch ungenugend
fundierten Schlussfolgerungen gefuhrt haben" (Dietrich
and Loretz 1992:92).
After reviewing more then a hundred years of research, it
seems to me that there is no lack of suggestions and
speculations in regard to the meaning and symbolism of
the JPFs. What we still miss is an updated, systematic
catalogue of figurines, and solid evidence for the
preference of one specific explanation.

Chapter III: The Typology of the JPFs
'1 can discover facts, Watson, but 1 cannot change them"
(Conan Doyle / Sherlock Holmes: "The Problem of Thor Bridge").
Typology may seem a "trifle", but it is a crucial stage in any
study of artifacts. Questions such as what makes a type of
figurine, and how can fragmented bodies or heads be
ascribed to a certain type are decisive. Typology is the
groundwork for any data-base, and determines what is
excepted - or excluded - from the discussion. This is not a
technical matter, and the effects of typology on dating,
origins or meaning of a certain type of figurine can be
substantial. Great care, and especially common sense, are
essential. Furthermore, defining one type involves its
separation from other types, which need then to be
mentioned. Therefore, the framework for discussion in the
current chapter is wider than the JPFs themselves.
111.1. Former Typologies and
Guiding Principles
The term "pillar-figurine" is a very common name in the
archaeological literature for figurines which are made in the
round and have a schematic, pole-like lower body, without a
separation of the legs. The base of these figurines is usually
wider than the body, to allow them to stand safely. This
term is too general for our needs: first, it encompasses a
huge geographic area, for pillar-figurines are found in the
Aegean, Cyprus, Phoenicia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Israel and
even the Punic World. Secondly, the temporal frame is too
vague, from the second millennium BC to the classical
periods at least.' Thirdly, the definition pillar-figurine is
not specific from an iconographic or technical point of view;
furthermore, it encourages associations with the 'pole' of the
Biblical Asherah or with 'pillar-cult' (associations which,
perhaps, have no basis). On the other hand, it is impossible
and useless to change such a deeply-rooted term. What we
need is a refinement and a clear sub-division of the different
types of pillar-figurines.
I have already mentioned various definitions of pillar-
figurines and JPFs (chapter II), and will concentrate here on
the main typologies offered, i.e., those of Holland (1975)
and Engle (1979). Holland included the JPFs among the
573 solid figurines of his type A, together with a varied
mixture of other types: figurines with legs (AXIII), sitting
figurines, peg figurines and even hollow, double-moulded
figurines (e.g., his type A.IV.g.2-3). This mixture prevented
Holland from reaching clear conclusions, and in fact, he did
1 For Mycenean Bronze Age pillar-figurines see Hagg 1981: figs.
1, 3; Gesell 1985:61f, photographs 61-62, 64-66. For Persian
period figurines from Cyprus see Gube1 1986: nos. 47, 49. For
Greece cf. Hadzisteliou-Price 1978: pls. 1-6. For an Early Bronze
example from Israel see de-Miroschedji 1995: 37 lower left; back
cover upper right. See further references in chap. 11.4.8 (above).
not define clearly a Judean form of pillar-figurine, nor did
he deal with every sub-type separately (Holland 1975:178ff;
1977:121f). This is unfortunate, since Holland had prepared
the ground for synthesis of a very detailed typology,
arranged according to the shape and number of curls (for the
moulded heads), or applied features (for the hand-made
heads; see also chapter III.6 and key 5 below).
Engle (1979:9) included most of Holland's types A II-AIX
under the term "classical pillar-figurines", relating them
with Judah. Engle did not discuss Holland's types AX-AX!
(all the body fragments), claiming that these could not be
classified; nor Holland's types A.XII-AXVII, which seemed
to him irregular or exceptional; neither Holland's type AI
(all the hand-made heads), which appeared "too featureless"
in his eyes. As a result, Engle (1979:11-12) studied only the
mould made heads of the JPFs, ca. 150 specimens. These
"classical pillar-figurines" were sorted into five sub-types
according to the shape of the eyes.
Engle believed that the center of the mould, where the eyes
are situated, is better preserved than the curls (1979:13-15).
At the same time, he claimed that his typology was
harmonious with that of Holland, which he abandoned
(clearly not a proper claim, cf. chap. III.6 below).
Engle (1979:13-15) admitted that he had no direct access to
the figurines and that his typology was arbitrary. It is thus
better to retain Holland's typology, and only combine
Engle's eye types in it. The eye-shapes are often obscure,
and Engle contradicted himself when he suddenly preferred
the curls for his type VI (though most of the figurines of this
type have clear eye-shapes, cf. app. 2: 92, 94). Engle
(1979:14-15) gathered doubtful cases in his type VII, but
admitted that the doubts concerned only the eye-shapes,
otherwise they were good "classical pillar-figurines". Engle
defined one type (VIII) as foreign to Judah - it is indeed so -
but he was pleased to leave the matter at hand, not
explaining in detail the differences between this "foreign"
type and the "classical pillar-figurines". Furthermore, this
"foreign" type is aetually a combination of many sub-types
from different geographical regions (app. 5 below), which
Engle failed to discuss.
The major limitation in Engle's work was the exclusion of
most of the JPFs from the discussion: he was left with ca.
150 artifacts (his types I-VII), or only 100 fit for
classification (if we exclude the doubtful type VII). This
stands in sharp contrast to the present catalogue of 854 JPFs
(excluding ca. 100 more from unknown origins, app. 3).
Therefore, the picture presented by Engle is very partial (cf.
chap. 11.4.1 and key 6).
It must be said that Ruth Amiran (1956) and R. Gophna
(1970) preceded Engle with a clear definition for the Judean
pillar-figurines, but did not go into details in these short
publications, nor discussed the possibilities and limitations
of the definition "Judean". Before making further
typological definitions, it is necessary to list a few guiding
principles that I used.
1. The Common Type
One of the main contributions of Engle (1979:9) was the
explicit use of the principle of a common type. In any
assemblage of figurines, we are likely to find many types of
different figurines, one or a few of each type beside many
similar figurines which belong to one or a few types. The
last are the main, or "common" type/s in the assemblage.
Among the other figurines, some may be similar (but not
exactly so) to the common type/s, and can be defined as
exceptional forms. Other figurines may be totally different
from the common type/s, e.g., exports from another site,
influences from other types of artifacts, or fruits of the whim
of a certain potter. Often, these unique figurines acquire a
lot of attention, since they may be much more interesting
artistically, than the common type/s (which is often
stereotyped). However, since I deal mainly with
archaeological and historical questions (distribution,
relation to Judah, etc.), and not artistic analysis, the
common type is central: it forms the great majority of any
assemblage, and the key to its understanding.
2. The Importance of Whole Figurines
Most of the figurines, except perhaps in burials or favissa,
are found broken, i.e., heads or bodies detached from each
other. How can one be related to the other? Engle chose a
convenient solution by ignoring all the body-fragments and
many of the heads (see above), but this results in a large
loss of data. One should try to learn from the whole
figurines about the fragments (below), hence the great value
of whole figurines. Whole figurines are also the starting
point for the study of the archaeological context (chap. VIII
below).
3. Main Typology according to the Heads
This is not a universal principle, but a result of the nature of
the JPFs. Most JPFs are found broken. Their pillar bodies
are hand-made, very schematic and standard. The heads are
much more varied in details, especially the moulded ones,
thus enabling a more detailed - and better - typology. It
does not mean that the body-fragments are neglected, only
that they form a secondary component within the main
typology.
4. Statistical Considerations
Exact definition of fragments is not always possible. Often,
a certain fragment may have belonged to two or three
different types of figurines. If the distribution-proportions of
these types are known, it may be meaningful. For example,
let us assume that a common type X appears 10 times more
than a rare type Y (the proportion may be judged from the
whole figurines, or from well-classified fragments).
Statistically, from every 10 fragments which may belong to
both X and Y, only one belongs to Y. When discussing type
X, it would be better to include the ten fragments in doubt,
even if one is likely to belong to type Y, rather than neglect
9 fragments of X. Of course, statistical calculations such as
this require a large amount of any type of artifact, and
strictly speaking, this can hardly be achieved for the JPFs.
Still, I would suggest that any consideration is better then
nothing, and the results can be tested in the future, when
enough finds accumulate.
111.2. Definition of a Judean Pillar-
figurine
I will define two major vananons of JPFs, which are
common to Late Iron Age Judah. This definition is not new,
but based on earlier studies.
1. Hand-made, "pinched" JPFs [fig. 4:1, my type A). The
figurines have a simple, solid, hand-made head and body.
They are all made from simple clay, usually covered with
white-wash. Above this appears often the remains of painted
decoration, usually simple bands of red or yellow. The
painting marks anatomical details (eyes, pupils, face, etc.),
or jewelery (necklaces, bracelets, etc.). The size of the
figurines vary from 10-16 em. The head and the body are
formed from the same lump of clay. The head was pinched
by the potter's fingers to form two shallow depressions for
eyes and a protruding nose. All the figurines portray a
standing woman who holds her hands under her breasts.
The fingers of the hands are not indicated, except rarely by
paint. The arms may meet each other or even merge as one
continuous band across the chest. They may support the
breasts or be placed a little beneath them. The lower body is
shaped as a pillar. The base is usually concave and always
slightly widening, to enable the figurine to be free standing.
There is no indication of feet, legs or sexual organs.
This type of JPF can be sorted into several sub-types,
according to features which were applied to the heads (cf
also key 2 below). These are my types A.l (simple heads);
A2 (heads with "turbans'); A.3 (heads with "turbans" and
side-locks); A4 (heads with hats) and A5-6 (few
exceptional heads, app. 2:53, 367, 368).
2. Mould-made face JPFs [fig. 4:2, my type B]. The body
of this variation of figurines is similar to that of type A,
showing a women holding her breasts, but the head was
made separately and attached to the body by means of a peg,
fitting into a deep depression in the upper body. After the
attachment, the clay of the neck was smoothed upwards to
hide the joint, often making the neck thick (out of
proportion). Sometimes the smoothing blurred the line of
the chin. These figurines are larger then their hand-made
sisters, varying between 14-21 em. in height. The head was
formed from a rounded lump of clay, stamped in an open
mould to form the face and the hairdress. The face is
usually round and full, with a smiling mouth and large eyes,

28 29
often exaggerated.? The lids are usually arched. The face is
surrounded from three sides by a curly hairdress.P There are
as many as 6 ridges with rows of curls above the forehead
(though one "linear" sub-type has only ridges without curls).
The curls vary in shapes, and the variations of the number of
rows and shape of curls enable a detailed typology (Fig. 6;
following Holland 1975; for more details cf. key. 3 below).
Usually there are protruding side-locks, descending to the
chin but never further down. These side locks are also curled
(unless they are simple or worn out). There is no indication
of ears, as if they are covered with the side-locks. The use
of white-wash and painted decoration in yellow and red is
common, (like in type A, above). The back of the head is
roughly made by hand. The head may be round at the top or
pointed, as if having a cap, but there is never an applied hat
(unlike the hand-made A.4 heads).
All the body fragments which belong to types A and B are
termed here as type C. They are further divided into three
sub-types: whole bodies (C.l), middle body fragments (C.2)
and bases (C.3), and all will be discussed later. Often, body
fragments cannot be associated with one specific type of
head.
In the following pages, I wish to show that these figurines
(my types A-B-C) are indeed the common type of
anthropomorphic clay figurines in Iron Age II Judah. This
involves the definition and cataloguing of other types of
figurines.
111.3. Typology of Other Figurines
Ca. 900 anthropomorphic figurines from Iron Age Israel
were catalogued in appendixes 4-5, and presented in the
format of a table (fig. 3 below).4 Most of these figurines
have archaeological contexts, or at least the sites of origin
are known, and very few figurines are of unknown origins.
The last were added for the sake of completeness, or in cases
where whole figurines from secure origins were not found. I
have listed all the anthropomorphic figurines, including all
of Holland's types A-C and many new ones. The fragments
are separated from whole, or nearly whole, figurines. 5 I
have focused on defining common types, and often grouped
together the various exceptions and irregular figurines. I
2 This is often called an archaic smile, after Greek figurines and
sculptures. It certainly does not indicate any direct connections
with the west.
3 I am using the term "hairdress" for convenience sake. It is not
always clear whether these heads show the natural hair, an
artificialwig or even some sort of a headdress.
4 No doubtmore female figurines exist (in private collections, new
excavations which were not yet published, etc.). The number here
is still large enoughto present a validgeneral picture.
5 By "nearly whole" I mean figurines, of which at least the head
and the upper body survived, to the extent that the position of the
arms can be recognized. For example, the position of the arms of
JPF no. 251 (app. 2) is not clear, thus it is not included among the
"nearly whole" figurines.
30
must stress that my aim is not to produce a detailed
catalogue of these 900 figurines, but just to study them as far
as they are useful for the understanding of the JPFs. For this
reason, I present the results briefly. Readers who may wish
to avoid this rather technical section can continue directly to
chap. 11.4 (below).
m.3.t. Transjordanian Figurines
(Appendix 4)
Information from Transjordan is still limited, and a detailed,
reliable catalogue is lacking. The Chronology is often not
clear, as are the contexts. In general, the Transjordanian
figurines are closer to the Phoenician and Coastal types than
to the JPFs (Dornemann 1983; Gubel 1991:137; Homes-
Fredericq 1987:92f). I have not tried to stress regional
differences, but these probably existed.
Drum players. App. 4.1 [Fig. 10:1-2]. 8 specimens. The
northern ones are similar to Phoenician figurines (app.
5.VI.2), with hollow, pillar bodies and drums held
perpendicular to the body (for the ridge on the body of nos.
1-2 cf. another figurine from unknown origins, app. 3:16).
The fragments from Amman are hard to define (nos. 4-5),
but probably belong to the same type. No. 3 from Gebel
Qal'ah is solid (?). For other types of drum players see app.
5.1.3, 5.V.I. For the identification of the drums see the
discussion in type 5.VI.2 (below).
Moulded heads. App. 4.n [fig. 10:3-5]. 26 specimens, but
cf. note at the end of app. 4.11. The bodies were not
preserved, and the heads may have belonged to different
types of figurines. They are all different from the JPFs: the
face is much more elongated and the hairdress includes long
side-locks, reaching the shoulders (or at least the chin).
Large ears are usually represented (except nos. 1, 13?, 25).
Some of the heads have necklaces with crossed pendants
(nos. 16, 17, 20). Nos. 18, 23, 24 have a special hairdress
(cf. mould 5.VIII.9 and figurines 5.VIII.6-8, 10, 16). The
painted decoration, when it survives, is white and black or
red and black. It seems that some of these 4.11 heads
belonged to type 4.1 figurines [fig. 10:2] and others to type
4.III or even to horse-and-rider figurines. As far as I know,
none of these Transjordanian heads is comparable to the
Judean heads (excluding one or two doubtful cases, when
inadequate publications or a bad ,preservation state prevent
exact classification).
Pillar bodies. App. 4.m [fig. 10:6]. 17 specimens. The
hollow bodies, nos. 13-17, have various positions: hands on
the stomach, on the breasts (?), holding a dove (?), etc.
Most of them come from northern Transjordan. The solid
bodies (nos. 1-12) include gestures of extended hands (no.
8), hands on the stomach (no. 4), along the body (no. 1), on
the breasts (no. 2), etc. All these bodies are different from
the JPFs, except two or three fragments, which look similar
to the JPFs but are too battered for exact classification (nos.
6, 7, 10).
Male figurines. App. 4.IV [fig. 10:7]. 7 specimens. As in
other areas, male clay figurines are rare. The only whole
figurine is "the traveler", no. 1, which has a hollow body.
Nos. 5-6 have solid bodies, but may had been rider figurines.
Nos. 2, 4, 7 have ate! (Egyptianizing) crowns. Daviau and
Dion (1994) suggested that these three heads represented the
godEl.
Hand-made, whole figurines and heads. App. 4.V [fig.
10:8-9]. 15 specimens. This is not a homogenous group, and
the differences between the sites are great. In general,
incised and applied decorations are common. The heads are
not similar to the JPFs, except perhaps in one case (no. 12).
The body of no. 1 is hollow, while those of nos. 8-9 are
solid, but not of the pillar type. No. 15 is unique. For the rest
of the figurines, the exact type/s of bodies are not clear.
Hand-made body fragments. App. 4.VI. 15 specimens. All
are not of the pillar type; most are fragments of legs, which
cannot be further classified. Nos. 14-15 are exceptional,
being fragments of large-sized clay sculptures. Large clay
sculptures are known from Cyprus and Edom (Connelly
1989; Beck 1995), but not from Judah.
Plaque figurines. App. 4. vn. 11 specimens, some made in
the traditions of the second millennium BC, with wide clay
backgrounds around the figure (nos. 1,4,5). Other figurines
lack the background (nos. 2, 10). A mould of a plaque
figurine is known from Tawilan (app. 5.VIII.5 below). NO.3
holds a drum, perhaps (if so, it belongs with type 5.V.l
below). For plaque figurines from Israel cf. app. 5.V2-
5.V.ll (below).
Plaque figurines of pregnant women. App. 4.vm [fig.
10:10]. 16 specimens. This type is very different from the
Late Bronze and early Iron Age plaque figurines, and more
similar to the coastal Iron Age II plaque figurines (type
5.V.9 below). It seems that it belongs to the late Iron Age II
as well; a large group of three figurines was found in
Buseirah, which flourished mainly during this period. The
hands survived in 8 specimens, always grasping the breasts,
with the thumb separated from the other fingers. The faces
are quite crude, with side-locks reaching the shoulders.
There is no proof that heads 10-16 belonged to these
figurines, but it is possible. No. 16 is exceptional, since it
has perhaps a peg (and thus belongs with type 4.11 heads).
Unique plaque figurines. App. 4.IX. 4 specimens. Three
of these figurines hold a child and one portrays a pregnant,
dressed woman. All come from the Jordan valley. For
discussion see Beck 1991.
Leg-fragments of plaque figurines. App. 4.X. 12
specimens. Nos. 1,2, Tl, 8 belonged possibly to type 4.VIII.
The rest cannot be classified any further.
Unclassified. App.4.XI. 8 specimens. Most of them were
found at Tell el-Mazar, but the quality of the preliminary
publication does not allow certain classification.
31
m.3.2. Exceptional/Other Figurines, mainly
from Judah (Appendix 5.1)
Included here are some types of figurines, that are similar
(but not identical) to the JPFs (5.1.1, 5.1.3). These have a
few different traits that mark them as variations, but are still
included in the JPFs' catalogue (app. 1-2). Other types are
not similar to the JPFs, though they were found in Judah;
these are presented below (5.1.2, 5.1.4-5.1.6).
Type 'Be' figurines. App. 5.U [fig. 4:5]. These figurines
have a typical JPF moulded head (my type B), but hollow,
wheel-made pillar bodies (my type E). Since the main
classification of the JPFs is done by heads, I have included
this type in the JPFs' catalogue. Only two whole figurines
are known of this type (app. 2:78, 183). A few similar
figurines from unknown origins may be added (see app.
3:16,87), but there is a danger that they are forged. This is
especially true for app. 3:16, which is perhaps "modelled"
on figurines from Transjordan (cf. app. 4.1.1-2 above; the
unique form of the lower body with a ledge).
Hollow pillar body-fragments. App. 5.L2. Only 8
specimens are known from Judah, 7 from Jerusalem and one
from Tel Beer Sheba. They could have belonged to figurines
like VI.1 (above), but also to types 5.111.1-6 or 5.IV6
(below).
Female drum-players. App. 5.L3 [fig. 4:3-4]. 10
specimens, 3 of which are in doubt. The figurines portray a
woman, who holds a disk of clay close to the chest. All the
other details are typical of the JPFs: solid pillar bodies and
simple hand-made heads (of type A). More specimens are
registered from unknown origins (cf. app. 3:12, 99). The
identification of the disk is discussed in relation to type
5.VI.2 (below). For other figurines of female drum-players
cf. types 4.1,5.111.6, 5.VI.
Miscellaneous heads. App. 5.L4. 24 specimens. The
heads are moulded (nos. 1-11) or hand-made (nos. 13-24),
but are all different from the JPFs' heads. They vary much
and do not form a homogeneous group. A few are badly
preserved or inadequately published, preventing further
classification (nos. 3, 4). No.8 may belong to the classical
periods. No. 16 is similar to Persian period figurines. No. 22
is similar to the coastal heads of type 5.1V (below). Most of
the heads were found in Jerusalem and Lachish.
Miscellaneous solid body parts. App. 5.L5. 24
specimens. All are different from the JPFs' pillar bodies,
e.g., in the position of the hands, in applied features, or in
the holding of an object. A few bodies seem quite similar to
the JPFs (nos. 1, 5, 13, 19, 20), and may be defined as
variations. Yet, they are not identical to the JPFs and are not
included among the last.
Unclassified Fragments. App. 5.L6. 9 specimens, mostly
coming from Beth Shemesh. Bad preservation and
inadequate publication prevent further classification.
 ID.3.3. Figurines with Pillar Bases, Mainly
from Judah (App. 5.II)
I have grouped here figurines with pillar bases, which are
definitely not female JPFs. It is necessary to discuss them in
order to settle the status of the pillar base fragments (my
type C.3, chap. 111.5). To this group must be added riders
with pillar bases (type H.l.p in the original Ph.D thesis. I
will use the data collected there without discussing these
figurines further). Most of the figurines of types 5.11 are
similar to the JPFs in manufacturing techniques, clay,
white-wash and painted decorations.
"Lamp" figurines. App. 5.ll.1. [fig. 8:1]. 4 specimens.
The figures carry lamps above their heads. This peculiar
type is rare, with two Transjordanian and two Judean
examples. No.3 is exceptional, similar to 5.1V types and not
to the JPFs. Lamp figurines are known from the Punic
world, Phoenicia and Cyprus (Beck 1991:91, nn. 24-26;
Isserlin 1976; Gubel 1986:120 no. 5; 1991:134;
Vandenabeele 1986:354, 356; 1989:266; Homes-Fredericq
1987:92; Yon and Caubet 1988:30).
Bird figurines with pillar bases. App. 5.ll.2 [fig. 8:2]. 34
specimens (no. 34 is from an unknown origin). All the
figurines are solid and hand-made (type E.I of Holland
1975). 25 clearly have pillar bases, while the situation of
the rest of the figurines is not clear. Most of the figurines
were found in Jerusalem (17), Tel en-Nasbeh (6) and Tel
Beer Sheba (3). Only one figurine from Tel es-Safi (no. 23),
and one from Hazor (no. 3), were found out of Judah. The
figurine from Hazor cannot be classified clearly, and its
similarity to the Judean bird-figurines is not clear. Holland
included figurines from Megiddo in his E.I type, but these
are different from the Judean ones (for details see the end to
app. 5.11.2; for an iconographic discussion of birds in the
ancient Near East see Keel 1977).
Male figurines with hand-made (type A) heads. App.
5.ll.3 [fig. 8:3]. 5 specimens. The definition of males is
based on the appearance of beards, since none of the
figurines are whole. The exact identity is not always clear,
and some of these figurines may have been riders. In
Trandsjordan, even what looks like a male beard is
sometimes only an elongated chin, which is common also
for female figurines. There are also hermaphrodite figurines,
though these are few (Beck 1991).
11.3.4. Coastal and Northern Moulded-Face
Types (App. 5.111)
I have classified here many figurines from the coastal plain
and northern Israel, including most of Holland's (1975) type
B. The majority of the figurines are from Iron Age levels,
but for some of the older excavations the dating is not clear.
The classification is based on the heads (instead of the
position of hands, like Holland's classification). The final
publications of new excavations, such as Tel Shera, Tel
Haror, Ekron, Dor, Megiddo and Hazor will surely
contribute greatly. Until then, only a preliminary typology
32
can be made. The grouping of the coast and the north is
done since on the one hand there are many similarities in
the form of figurines from both these areas, while on the
other hand the quantities of (published) figurines are not so
great as in Judah.
The female pillar figurines of these areas are usually more
elaborate than the JPFs. They have long side-locks, reaching
the shoulders or the neck at least. The ears are large and
often exaggerated. Moulded necklaces are common, and
sometimes there are pendants on the forehead. The faces
are more delicate than the JPFs faces, with better, more
elongated proportions. In many cases, the head was formed
from a lump of clay larger thqJt the size of the mould,
leaving a sort of an un-moulded circumference around the
face. Usually the body is wheel-made and hollow. Apart
from these general traits, there are many variations in the
shape of the figurines. 6
"Schematic" coastal type. App. 5.m1 [fig. 7:1]. 6
specimens, all from the southern coastal plain. Only one
figurine has part of a hollow body (no. 2). The faces are
elongated and characterized by an abundant use of incised
lines (some may have been added after the moulding). In
this type, the lines are rather crude. The hairdress flows in
long side-locks behind the ears, until the beginning of the
neck. The locks are marked by horizontal lines. There is a
necklace made of a few short lines, and sometimes a
pendant on the forehead as well.
"Delicate" coastal type. App. 5.m2 [fig. 7:2-4]. 12
specimens, all from the southern coastal plain. Only one has
remains of a hollow body. The heads are similar to type
5.111.1 (above), but much more delicate, without the crude
lines. Heads nos. 1-7 are very similar and may have been
made in the same mould (or mould-series, for which see
chap. VI below). Unfortunately, many of the photographs of
these heads do not show the details clearly. There is a
necklace, with a large central pendant featuring a rosette.
. with legs (riders? - nos. 7, 9); playing woman (no. 12) and
Heads nos. 8-12 vary a little from each other [fig. 7:3-4].
The center of production of these heads may have been at
Tel Gemmeh (Gophna 1970), but central Philistine sites,
such as Ekron and Ashkelon, may prove otherwise.
Heads with long, combed locks. App. 5.m3 [fig. 7:5]. 9
specimens, all from the southern coastal plain. Only one
(no. 6) has part of a hollow body and hands under the
breasts. The head from Kh. Hoga is the most beautiful [fig.
7:5]. The hair is collected in thick side-locks, which curl
alongside the face and almost meet under the chin. The
locks are delicately combed with vertical lines (except no. 7,
perhaps). Figurine no. 2 was dated to the Persian period,
and the manufacture of these heads may have continued
later then the Iron Age period. No. 9 from Ekron was said to
have "Egyptianizing" features (Gitin 1995:73), but it is a
local coastal head.
6 For another whole figurine with hollow body and moulded face,
ofa "northern" type, see Oman 1986:34 (origin unknown). Another
example is now in the Hecht Museum, University of Haifa (reg.
no. H.792).
Heads with long, uncombed locks. App. 5.m4 [fig. 7:6]. ID.3.5. Coastal and Northem Hand-made
4 specimens. These are similar to type 5.III.3 (above), only Head Types and Miscellaneous (App. 5.1V)
simpler and without the combing. They are more crude in
appearance. Types 5.III.7-8 may possibly belong here too.
Fairly whole pillar figurines. App. 5.IV.1 [fig. 8:4]. 8
Most of the 5.IIIA heads were found at Megiddo. They
specimens. Unfortunately, the data from Tel Gemmeh and
resemble some of the hollow heads from the same site
Tel el-Ajjul is very partial. Most of the figurines have
(5.VI.5-8 below), but the technique is very different.
hollow pillar bodies. No. 3 probably holds a drum. Nos. 4-5
have typical coastal type heads (of type 5.111.3 above). It is
not clear whether their bodies are hollow or solid (the same
Heads with "crescent" hairdress. App. 5.m5 [fig. 7:7]. 4
is true for no. 6). Nos. 6-7 from Megiddo are different. No.
specimens. This is not a homogeneous group. No. 3 has a
8 holds a drum perpendicular to the body; its face is mould
hollow body and holds a drum in its hands. The heads of
made (?).
this group are quite similar to the heads of the JPFs, more
than any other coastal group. Some do not have ears, like
Peg figurines. App. 5.IV.2. 10 specimens. The term "peg
the JPFs, but most have a wide "frame" of clay around the
figurine" was coined by Petrie, for very crude hand-made
moulded face (unlike the JPFs).
figurines whose lower body is pointed and solid, like a peg.
They were probably stuck into the earth. Often they feature
women, but some examples do not have clear signs of sex.
Northern drum players. App. 5.m6 [fig. 7:8]. 7
The heads are usually similar to type 5.IIIJ (above). Some
specimens, 6 from Megiddo and one from Samaria. Only
of the figurines are from the Iron Age I, featuring wailing
one (no. 1) has remains of a hollow, wheel-made body.
women with their hands on their heads (Dothan 1982:
Unlike bodies of JPFs and southern coastal types, this body
237ff). Other figurines are dated to the Iron Age II, and
is shaped as a cylinder with ridges, and its section is very
have stump hands or hold their hands on their breasts.
thick (like pottery juglets). The face is rather crude and the
hair is indicated by many horizontal lines. The position of
"Ashdodite" coastal heads. App. 5.IV.3 [fig. 8:5-8]. 21
the arms of no. 7 is like the Phoenician type of drum players
specimens, all from the southern coastal plain. They are
(5.VI.2 below), but its head is similar to the heads of type
very common at Ashdod, hence the name "Ashdodite".
5.V.l (for a similar head from Samaria, without body, cf.
Usually they are flattened from above (it was suggested that
5.III.7.28 below).
they had applied hats, but there is no proof for this). The
eyes are indicated by small clay pellets (or disks), applied to
the depressions formed by hand. The aquiline noses are also
Northern moulded heads. App. 5.m 7 [fig. 7:9]. 41
applied. Usually there are representations of applied ears
specimens. Many figurines of this group were inadequately
and mouths; sometimes there is an incised line across the
published or badly preserved, and cannot be classified
mouths. All these details are not found among the JPFs'
clearly. Most of the heads have long side-locks and some
hand-made heads. The Ashdodite heads belonged to more
have ears (nos. 7, 8, 10, etc.). NO.6 may be a male figurine.
than one type of figurine: to peg and pillar figurines (nos. 1-
No.7 has a hole (for suspension?), but it is the only case
2), as well as solid female figurines (no. 10), solid figurines
known among the 900 figurines in appendixes 4-5. It is not
(
a hole for firing, of the type found in hollow heads [cf. fig.
even a naked male [fig. 8:5]. Comparisons to the Ashdodite
9:6 and type 5.VI.5 below]. Body parts are preserved in no. heads are known from Cyprus and Phoenicia (Courtois
11 (hollow body and stump hands, extended sideways); nos.
1984: pls, 9, 10; fig. 24; Karageorghis 1993: pI. 18:7, 10).
12,36 (solid body, one hand on the shoulder holding a veil);
and no. 39 (hand-made body). No. 20 from Megiddo is
"Ashdoda" heads. App. 5.IV.4 [fig. 8:9]. 7 specimens.
reminiscent of heads from the Jordan valley (4.11.18,23,24
This type is fairly close to type 5.IV.3 (above), but more
above). No. 25 may be later then the Iron Age. For no. 28 cf.
schematic. The only whole figurine of this type (no. 1) is the
figurine 5.111.6.7 (above).
famous so-called "Ashdoda" [fig. 8:9], showing a women
with a body shaped as a rectarigular chair or bed. The heads
are flattened from above, cylindrical and without any clear
Coastal moulded heads. App. 5.mS. 40 specimens. It
separation between the neck and the head. The eyes and the
seems that most of these heads belong to female figurines
nose are applied. The connections between the "Ashdoda"
with hollow bodies (cf. types 5.111.1-5.III.5 above). No. 17 is
and Aegean figurines are obvious (cf. especially no. 4, and
the only whole one, a women playing a string instrument. Dothan 1982 for discussion). It is possible that type 5.IVA
Like the other 5.III types, the heads are different from the
heads are the forerunners of type 5.1V.3 heads (the whole
JPFs' heads: they have ears and long side-locks
Ashdoda figurine is dated to the Iron Age I period). For
(notwithstanding the many cases of badly preserved or Cypriote comparisons cf. Courtois 1984: figs. 24:14; 26:9.
inadequately published specimens, which cannot be
classified). Most of the heads were found at Ashdod and Tel Miscellaneous heads. App. 5.IV.5. 41 specimens. Many
Gemmeh. A few have an Aegean "Daedalic" type of coiffure
heads in this group cannot be adequately classified. No.4 is
(nos. 1, 7, 8, 15; cf. Schwartz 1989: pl. 49:6-8). hollow. Body parts were preserved in 17 specimens, and
33
they are usually solid. They include figurines with legs
(nos. 6-8, 10, 21?, 22, 34, 38) and other forms (nos. 9, 14).
Another figurine is holding an object (28). There is also one
pillar shaped body (no. 20, in doubt) and one hollow body
(no. 23). Heads nos. 12, 13, 17? and 19 form a special
group, probably of male figurines. Almost all the heads of
type 5.1V5 have incised or applied features. Only no. 24
from Tel Gemmeh is close in form to the hand-made JPFs'
heads, but unlike them it has incised nostrils. Some of the
heads from Tel Gemmeh are close to type 5.1V.3. No.9 is
similar to no. 39, and both belong, probably, to the Iron Age
I period.
Hollow body-parts (of types 5.rn-5.1V). App. 5.IV.6. 23
specimens. Nos. 1, 4-18, 21 are certainly hollow. A few of
them hold their breasts, others hold a drum (nos. 14-16,21)
or some other, unidentified object (nos. 17, 18?). Nos. 2-3
are very similar to each other, but it is not clear whether or
not their bodies are hollow. For no. 9 cf. 5.1II.6.1,above.
Solid body parts. App. 5.IV.7. 28 specimens. They are all
made in the round, but have varied arm positions: on the
chest (nos. 4, 12?, 13, 16?); on the stomach (nos. 2, 3, 7, 17,
23, 28); lifted (nos. 1, 14, 26, 27); behind the back (no. 5);
alongside the body (no. 8, 18) and holding an object (no.
24). Two or three fragments resemble the JPFs, to a certain
extent (nos.'8, 10, 27), but they all have features which do
not appear among the JPFs.
Solid fragments, unclassified. App. 5.IV.8. 11 specimens.
All have remains of legs, except no. 1, but each is different
from the other.
m.3.6. Plaque Figurines (App. 5. V)
Plaque figurines are made of shallow, rectangular (or
somewhat oval) lumps of clay, moulded in the front with a
shallow mould (usually). They were very popular during the
Late Bronze Age. At Gezer, many were attributed to the
early Iron Age period, and Holland accepted this dating.
Today, it seems that some at least belong to the Late Bronze
Age, following better dated examples from newer
excavations at Gezer and elsewhere. In any case, there are
also plaque figurines from clear Iron Age I contexts. During
the Iron Age II, they are restricted to a few types, which are
very different from their Bronze Age predecessors. I have
classified the plaque figurines mainly by the shapes of the
heads, consistent with the classification of the JPFs.
Drum players. App. 5.V.1 [fig. 11:1-2]. 42 specimens (cf.
also 4.VII.3 below). Most of these figurines have already
been discussed by Beck (1991). They hold a disk of clay
close to the chest, usually covering one breast. The edge of
the disk is often decorated with geometric patterns of incised
lines," The identification of the disk as a drum is discussed
7 The identification of plaque figurines is much easier then round
figurines, since the head forms a direct continuation of the body,
and a small body-part may suffice. Also, plaque-figurines are
more sturdy then round ones (chap. VII and fig. 30 below).
34
below (in type 5.VI.2). The moulding of these figurines is
shallow. The women wear bracelets and often rings on the
ankles. The figurines were made from different moulds and
vary in details. No. 9 from Tel Ira is unique: it portrays a
Hermaphrodite figure (Beck 1991). The figurines were
dated to the Iron Age I and II. It is possible to discern
within them one group, which is more deeply and crudely
moulded. The figurines in this group hold a small drum,
usually with both hands (unlike the more common position
of one hand holding the bottom of the drum and the other
hand beating it). Most of this group was found in
Transjordan, it is less decorated and has simpler hairdresses
(without curls around the face).
Plaque figurines in the tradition of the second
millennium BC. App. 5.V.2 - 5.V.6 [fig. 11:3-9]. 73
specimens. Almost all of these figurines have a wide, un-
moulded clay background around the moulded part (except
type 5.V6). The moulding is shallow. There are many
variations in the position of the arms (on the chest, along
the body, uplifted, holding lotus branches, etc.). I have
sorted the figurines according to the hairdress styles (unlike
Holland), since in many cases only the heads survived and
the position of the arms is unknown.
"Hathor" hairdress. App. 5.V.2 [fig. 11:3]. 33 specimens,
all having wide clay backgrounds and shallow moulding. 18
of them depict a naked woman with the arms extended
sideways and holding lotus branches (nos. 1-2, 8-11, 12?,
13-16, 21-23, 25-27, 29). Other figurines are holding their
breasts (nos. 4-7, 24). Few figurines hold one hand on the
chest and the other along the body (nos. 3, 31), both hands
along the body (no. 28), or both hands on the belly (no. 30).
"Hathor" hairdress with a cap of "feathers". App. 5.V.3
[fig. 11:4]. 7 specimens from Gezer. They all have a wide
clay background. The "feathers" appear as vertical lines on
the forehead, but the meaning of this hairdress is not clear.
No. 5 does not have "Hathor" side-locks, but the drawing is
not very good. When the bodies have been preserved, they
show naked females with their hands on their breasts
(except no. 1, which has one hand along its body). No.7
from Gezer dates probably to the Late Bronze Age. For the
"feather" hairdress cf. also type 5.V5 below.
"Crescent" hairdress. App. 5.V.4 [fig. 11:5]. 22
specimens. The side-locks descend straight downwards, and
are usually shorter then those ofthe former types. They do
not curl outside at the lower end like the "Hathor" hairdress.
There are some variations, with many figurines having
narrow clay backgrounds and hands on their bellies. Nos. 1-
4 from Tel Beit Mirsim were found in level B of the late
Iron Age I period. Nos. 12-14 from Gezer have a special
hairdress. Nos. 15-16, 18, 22 are made in the tradition of
type 5.V.II. Some of the drawings and photographs are poor,
preventing exact classifications. . 8 It seems that the general trend in development of plaque
"Feathers" hairdress without side-locks. App. 5.V.5 [fig.
11:6]. 4 specimens, including one mould. Unlike type
5.V3, the heads protrude from the plaque and lack clay
backgrounds. No. 4 is the only whole figurine, with its
hands holding its breasts. This is probably a northern group,
found at Ta'anakh and Megiddo.
"Uraeus symbol" hairdress. App. 5.V.6 [fig. 11:7-8]. 7
specimens. They have no clay backgrounds. Part of the body
survived for no. 2, with hands holding breasts. The symbol
on the head is not really identical among all these figurines.
Sellin (1904:74) suggested that this symbol was an Egyptian
uraeus (viper), followed by Giveon (1967). This explanation
was criticized by Lapp (1964:40).
Other plaque figurines. App. 5.V.7 [fig. 11:9]. 38
specimens. This is not a homogeneous group. No. 1 is a
double flute player; nos. 2-4 carry a child; nos. 5-7 are
exceptional, perhaps indicating western influences. Nos. 8-
14 from Beth Shean form a special group of simple, crude
figurines from tombs (cf. perhaps 5.V.4.21, but the
photograph is bad). The figurine from Tel Zeror, no. 17,
has a "Hathor" hairdress, but the body is almost without a
clay background (unlike type 5.V2 above).
Body fragments with background. App. 5.V.8. 31
specimens, probably of types 5.V.2 - 5.V6 (above). Only a
few can be classified exactly (e.g., nos. 4, 23, which were
holding lotus branches). The fragments from Ashdod may
have belonged to type 5.V9 (below).
Pregnant plaque figurines in deep moulding. App. 5.V.9.
21 specimens. This appears to be quite a common type in
the southern coastal plain (for comparable Transjordanian
figurines cf. type 4.VIII above). It seems to be a late Iron
Age II development. 8 A large group of these figurines was
found in Ashdod (nos. 1-7). The hands lie on the chest, or
one hand lies along the body and the other on the chest.
Some figurines were found in levels 1-3 of area D, while
others were not stratified. A second group from Tel
Gemmeh is different from the Ashdodite group. These
figurines are made from large clay lumps, stamped in a
smaller mould (thus leaving a clay background). The
photographs in the report are, unfortunately, not very good.
The classification of nos. 19-20 is not clear. I have included
here also the Tel Batash plaque figurines, which are unique
(19-21), but share the deep moulding, the long side-locks
and the suggestion of pregnancy.
Miscellaneous body fragments. App. 5.V.10. 29
specimens. Nos. 1-8 have no backgrounds (from Ashdod,
Ta'anakh and Megiddo). The other figurines include a wild
range of peculiarities or unclassified fragments. Nos. 10, 16
and 25 have a peculiar decoration on the belly. They are
perhaps fragments of female drum-players.
figurines began with figurines with clay-backgrounds (first wide
and later narrow). The next stage were figurines whose heads
protrude from the background; fmally the figurines lost the
background completely. Technically, there is perhaps a movement
from shallow moulding to deep moulding. This is nothing but a
tentative suggestion.
35
Leg fragments. App. 5.V.H. 10 fragments, too battered or
small for further classification.
m.3.7. Phoenician Figurines (App. 5.VI)
I am using the term Phoenician for convenience sake, to
avoid a long geographic term such as "the Coast of Northern
Israel". The number of excavations in central Phoenicia
(Lebanon) is limited, and published reports are few (in
general see Ward 1994). Many of the figurines below
deserve the "Phoenician" label, while in some cases it is
more a matter of an accepted convention. The chronology
of each type is not easy to define, with some types
continuing well into later periods.
In general, the figurines grouped here as Phoenician are
technically superior to the JPFs. Many are made in a double
mould, with hollow heads and bodies. They tend to be more
realistic, with the faces better portrayed. Also, some unique
types appear in this group, such as the so-called dea Tyria
and the daily life scenes.
"Dea Tyria", App. 5.VI.1 [fig. 9:1]. 16 specimens. The
bodies are hollow and made in a double mould. The
figurines depict sitting, pregnant women, holding one hand
on their bellies and the other on their knees. Some of these
figurines are later then the Iron Age (nos. 8-10, 12? 13-14).
Many are derived from illegal excavations; and their origins
are unknown (not included here, except no. 15). Their name
was coined by Culican (1969), and they are common in
Phoenicia (Culican 1969; 1975-6; Gubel 1986:113 nos. 36-
38; 1991:131; Pritchard 1988:49-52, fig. 12; Vandenabeele
1986:351f). They are also common in Cyprus, at sites like
Kition and Amathos (Beer 1991:78; Caubet 1991: fig. 4a-b;
Gubel 1991:131; Sophocleous 1985: pI. 18:1, figs. 7-9;
Vandenabeele 1986:35lf; 1989:266; Yon and Caubet 1988:
3lf, figs. 2a, 7a, 8a, 9), and in the Punic world (Gubel
1991:131, with references).
Women playing drums. App. 5.Vl.2 [fig. 9:2-3]. 15
specimens. Most of these figurines have hollow, wheel-made
bodies (my type E). The body of nos. 11-13 is also hollow,
but the position of the arms is different. No. 11 holds a dove
(?), cf. fragments 5.VI.5.27-28 from Tel Keisan (below).
All the faces are made in a mould. The hair is collected in
long side-locks, often ending with a large "bun" or "ear-
lobe" shape on the shoulders (nos. 5, 9). In other cases, the
side-locks are twisted (no. 7) or simple (cf. Elgavish
1994:64). The figurines hold a large disk perpendicular to
the body.
Formerly, the disk was explained as a sacred loaf of bread or
as a cake (e.g., Glueck 1945). Meyers claimed that the disk
was a drum only when it was perpendicular to the body (like
in my types 4.1, 5.VI.2). When it was fastened to the
breasts, it was not a drum (thus Meyers 1987:117f;
1991:18f; cf. Meerschaert 1991:183f).
I find it hard to agree with this view: the decoration at the
edges and especially the way in which the hands are
portrayed (one holding the lower side of the disk and the
other beating flatly against it) fit the position of a drum. It
seems to me that both types convey the same theme, and
only the technique is different (round figurines vs. plaque
figurines). In coroplastic art, it is harder to depict a drum
perpendicular to the body; furthermore, such a depiction is
impossible for the manufacturing of plaque figurines, which
are flattened lumps of clay stamped in a very shallow,
frontal mould. It seems that in both cases we are dealing
with drums, only the style of presentation is different.
Another argument in favour of this conclusion is the fact
that there are female figurines in Cyprus and Phoenicia,
which do hold loaves or cakes, but these are different from
drum-holding figurines (Yon and Caubet 1998:30; for
drums in the Bible see Keel 1972:335ff; Schmidt-Colinet
1981; Mitchell 1992).
In any case, drum-holding figurines are very common in
Cyprus and Phoenicia (Gubel 1986:120 no. 49;
Karageorghis 1987:17-19, nos. 7, 27, 29; Yon and Caubet
1988:30f, fig. 6a; Bisi 1989:259f; Vandenabeele 1989:266,
268; Meyers 1991:20f; S~rensen 1991: pl. 68e; Meerschaert
1991:183-186; Caubet 1992:262). They are also quite
common in the Punic World (Ferron 1969; note that also
there the disk is fastened to the chest).
Daily scenes. App. 5.VL3 [fig. 9:4]. 3 specimens. This is a
rare type in Northern Israel. It depicts kinds of daily
activities: a woman kneading dough, a bathing women and a
women holding an object (a phallus?). Similar daily scenes
in clay are known from Cyprus and the Punic world (Bisi
1979: fig. 4; Karageorghis 1987: group 1, pl. 1:1-4;
Vandenabeele 1986:354-357; 1989:267).
Other, fairly whole, figurines. App. 5.VL4. 4 specimens.
The exact type to which these figurines belong is not clear
(perhaps 5.VI.l?).
Miscellaneous fragments. App. 5.VL5 [fig. 9:5-8]. 42
specimens, including heads and body fragments. Nos. 1-24,
36-38 are heads, mostly hollow and made in a double mould
[fig. 9:5]. The hole in the back side of the head was called a
ventilation hole (Holland 1975; Keisan I:335f). Its function
is to prevent explosion of the head when the air inside is
heated during firing. Few heads are solid (nos. 3, 4?, 11,
13), and as for the rest of the heads, the structure is not
clear. Most of the heads have long side-locks behind the
ears. Vertical lines above the forehead mark the hair. The
facial features are delicate.I'' Some heads are reminiscent
of the famous "woman at the window" ivories. Head no. 5
[fig. 9:5] belongs, probably, to a rider. The body parts, nos.
24-35 and 39-41, are hollow and wheel-made (as far as can
be judged). They were found at Tel Keisan and Kabri. One
similar head is dated to the Persian Period (no. 42).
10Holland (1975)placeda head from Gileam(here app. 5.VI.5.3)
in his type A.IV.a (among JPF figurines). It seems that it belongs
to a type found in Shiqmona (cf app. 5.VI.5.13, 17, etc.) and is
different from the JPFs.
36
Miscellaneous. App. 5.VL6. 7 specimens. Most of these are
hollow fragments of figurines, whose archaeological origins
are unknown.
m.3.8. Miscellaneous (App. 5.VB - 5.VDI)
Figurines from later periods. App. 5.VILI. 23 specimens.
Holland (1975) included all these figurines in his work. I
have listed them in the appendix, only to show that they are
later from the Iron Age and therefore have no direct relation
with the JPFs. They need not be discussed further here.
Miscellaneous. App. 5.VIL2. 6 specimens. Holland (1975)
included them in his work. They are either made of stone or
faience, or belong to periods other than the Iron Age II. A
few represent fragments of animal figurines, or fragments
whose archaeological origins are unknown.
Moulds. App. 5.vm. 21 specimens, excluding 7 other
specimens already included in appendixes 4-5 (for details
see note in app. 5.VIII). It was necessary to present these
moulds in relation to the questions of production, mould-
series and origin of the technique (discussed in chap. VI).
IlIA. The Classification of the Whole
Figurines
I have catalogued 53 whole, or nearly whole, JPFs
(appendixes 1-2, excluding the addition to app. 2). Six of
these figurines are defined as exceptional (four have drums,
type 5.1.3; and two have hollow bodies, type 5.1.1). This
leaves 48 "regular" whole JPFs of my types Ac-Bc (a few are
nearly whole, my types A+, B+. One figurine lacks breasts,
app. 2:8; and another carries a child, app. 2:232). All these
53 figurines were found in Judah, except perhaps one or two
from sites on the western border, whose exact political
affiliation is not clear (cf. chap. V below). There is only one
exception - a figurine from Tel el-Oreimeh, but it has a
hollow body (type Be, app. 5.1.1). It does not matter if one
excludes type Be for being exceptional or includes it with
the JPFs, since there are so few figurines of this type (app.
5.1.1). The conclusion is clear: according to the whole
figurines, the definition of the JPFs as Judean is valid. These
figurines are indeed the common (anthropomorphic) type in
Iron Age II Judah.
It is possible to start to see regional assemblages according
to the evidence of the whole figurines. The Judean
coroplastic assemblage includes the JPFs, but also the much
rarer types 5.1.3, 5.11.2 and 5.11.3. Characteristic of all of
these is the simple, solid, pillar body, usually covered with
white-wash and often decorated with simple bands of yellow
and red paint. Most of these traits are shared with other
types of Judean figurines, such as animal figurines (not
discussed here). On the other hand, in the coastal plain,
Phoenicia and Transjordan, the assemblages are different.
The common types of female figurines in these areas have
hollow, wheel-made bodies; and the moulded heads are
different (having large ears, long side-locks of hair,
necklaces etc.). Even the simpler hand-made common types
of female figurines are different from the Judean ones (e.g.,
in the use of incisions and applications).
111.5. The Classification of Heads
and Body Fragments of the JPFs
The conclusion about the differences in the assemblages of
the whole figurines (above) is valid also when considering
the figurine fragments. Among the ca. 850 figurines in app.
4-5 (excluding the Judean types of 5.1.1, 5.1.3 and, of course,
the figurines of app. 5.VII), only a handful look similar to
the JPFs (e.g., 4.111.6-7; 4.Y.12; 5.111.5.1-2, 4).
Furthermore, it is likely that most of these figurines are not
really similar to the JPFs, but belong to other types of
figurines. The "similarity" is only a result of inadequate
publications or bad state of preservation, which prevent us
from noticing differences. Certainly, there are very few JPFs'
fragments outside Judah - while the opposite is also true:
there are few "foreign" figurines in Judah.
Before continuing, we must first sort some problems
regarding the identification of the fragments of the JPFs
themselves.
m.5.1. The Possibility that Heads of Types
A-B belong to Bodies not of Type C
It is clear that in a few rare cases the type B heads appear
with a hollow pillar body (type Be, App. 5.1.1, cf. fig. 3
above). There is no other type of figurine that I know of,
inside or outside Judah, which has heads of type B with
bodies that are not solid pillar bodies (type C). There are 22
whole JPFs with B heads (Be, B+, app. 1-2) versus only 2
whole figurines of type Be (app. 5.1.2). If we rely on this
relation, some 10% of the B heads may have been connected
to hollow E bodies. In absolute numbers, it would mean ca.
14-15 heads. 11 Type Be seems to be a hybrid form between
the JPFs and the coastal or Phoenician pillar figurines. One
of the two whole Be figurines was found at Tel el-Oreimeh,
outside Judah. The other was found at Lachish, near
Philistia.
In any case, the body-fragments present the same picture: I
have found only 8 fragments of hollow pillar bodies in
Judah (app. 5.1.2), versus 245 solid, regular JPFs' bodies
(types Cl-C3 in app. 1-2). In other words, hollow pillar
bodies are extremely rare, forming only ca. 3.3% of the
bodies in Judah. This is, no doubt, a negligible percentage
(based on a large enough amount of artifacts).
11 Again excluding the addition to app. 2, which, if included,
would further support my argument.
37
The conclusion is clear: apart from very few figurines of
type Be, heads of types A and B are always related with
solid pillar bodies of type C.
m.5.2. The Possibility that Heads of Type A
Belonged to Disk-Holding Bodies
When we judge by the whole figurines, most of the types of
female drum players do not have A type heads at all (see
5.VI.2, 5.V.l and 4.1). It is clear that the possibility of type
A heads and disk-holding bodies applies only to type 5.1.3.
There are currently 27 whole JPFs with type A heads and
type C bodies (app. 1-2, types Ac, A+), versus only 3 whole,
or nearly whole figurines of type 5.1.3.12 If we rely on this
relation, ca. 11.5% of type A heads could have belonged to
drum-players of type 5.1.3.
The fragments may help us here again: there are 123 JPFs'
body fragments, that show a clear position of hands
supporting the breasts (app. 1-2, among types Cl-C2). On
the other hand, there are only 7 body fragments in app. 1-2,
which hold a drum (three of which are doubtful). This 123:7
relation means that ca. 5.7% of type A heads could have had
drums, a fairly low percentage.
I would further argue that type 5.1.3 is a Judean type of
figurine. Apart from the drum, all the other features are
exactly similar to the JPFs. Thus, including this type in the
JPFs' corpus (as I did) would not matter in regard to the
discussion about the borders of Judah (chap. V).
m.5.3. The Possibility that Heads of Type A
Belonged to Solid Rider Figurines
The hand-made type A heads are very similar to heads of
horse and rider figurines from Judah (but not from other
areas). The Judean riders were discussed in the original
Ph.D work as type H.l. Without the body, the classification
of the head is often not clear. But it is enough to have a
small body part, or even the section of the neck. The necks
are rounded in the JPFs, while they are much thinner and
crescent shaped in the riders. Unfortunately, information on
this is missing from many of the early excavation reports.
Against 27 whole JPFs with type A heads, there are only 2
whole riders with the same type of head (one from Lachish,
Lachish III: pl. 29:18 and Holland 1975: D.VI.a.l1 =
D.XV.a.6; the other from Beth Shemesh, Mackenzie 1912:
88 pls, 53, 54:3 and Holland 1975: D.VI.a.2). This is a
fairly negligible relation. Differences of size may help to
distinguish the two types: the riders are significantly smaller
than the JPFs. Heights of heads of Judean riders vary
between 13-23 mm (17 specimens with an average of 18
12 Thesethreewholefigurines are app. 1-2: nos. 45,118,359.
mm), while those of type A JPFs' heads vary between 15-32
mm (104 specimens with an average of 26 mm).13
ID.5.4. The Problem of Relating the Body
Fragments (types C.1-C.2) to the Heads
The question is whether C.I-C.2 body fragments can be
related to heads, which are not of types A-B? If so, it would
mean that perhaps not every C body is a JPFs. This seems a
very rare possibility, if at all. Inside Judah, there are no
whole examples for this (among all the figurines in app. 5.1
and 5.11. Of course, there is nothing of this sort in app. 1-2).
This is true for figurines from other areas (app. 4-5), which
have hollow bodies or different arms positions (unlike C.l-
C.2). Theoretically, few figurines of this kind may exist
(perhaps among type 5.1V), and are perhaps unknown to me
because of poor photographs or partial publications, but at
the moment we can consider this to be a purely theoretical
possibility.
Therefore, we must discuss the pillar bodies of types Cl-C2
in relation to the JPFs. One should not dismiss them as
impossible for classification, as did Engle (1979). On the
contrary, they are quite distinctive. Furthermore, whenever
the upper end of the body remains, it is possible to classify it
more exactly than assumed so far. Type A heads were made
as part of the body, and when broken would leave a simple
section at the neck. Type B heads have a peg, and when
broken would either leave a distinctive depression in the
body (if the peg remained intact with the head), or appear as
an inner circle in the section of the neck. This enables us to
associate body fragments with types A or B exactly, but
regrettably, earlier excavators missed this opportunity and
did not present the necessary evidence in most of the
publications. 14
ID.5.5. The Problem of the Definition of
the Pillar Bases, Type C.3
This is the hardest problem, since bases C.3 could belong
not only to the JPFs, but also to lamp figurines (type 5.11.1),
bird figurines with pillar bases (type 5.11.2) and riders with
pillar bases (type H.1.p in the original Ph.D). The ratio
between the whole figurines, JPFs on one hand and all these
other types on the other hand is 49:9. We can compare body
parts (only those that have the base) as well; JPFs' fragments
of types Cl and C2 versus the other types mentioned above.
Then the ratio is more in favour of the JPFs. Still, quite a
large proportion of C.3 bases could have belonged to the
13 Unfortunately, I have studied these differences at a rather late
stage, after including all the type A heads in app. 1-2. It is possible
that a few of the smaller heads among them are riders, but it was
senseless to start all of the appendixes and tables from the
beginning because of a few items.
14 In app. 1: field "breaks", a small letter "p" indicates a
depression of a peg in a body, or an intact peg left with a head. Of
course, it appears only when the neck is broken (code 1).
38
other types and not to the JPFs. The current number of C.3
bases is considerable (43 in app. 1-2, and much more with
the addition to app. 2), thus their fate must be decided. IS
Despite the problem, I have retained all C.3 bases as JPFs'
bases (in app. 1-2). Most of them did belong to JPFs, and
their exclusion would be a loss. A more substantial
reasoning is the fact that almost all the other types
mentioned above (5.ll.1-2 and H.1.p) are also Judean
figurines, found in Judah and having the same coroplastic
tradition. They all share with the JPFs the solid, hand-made
pillar body, the white-wash and simple painted decoration,
the schematic rendering, the lack of incised and applied
details, etc. Thus, even if I had included a few bases of these
figurines among the JPFs' corpus, this is a well calculated
risk that would have no effect on the Judean definition of the
JPFs.
Following the conclusions of sections 111.5.1-5, I have
defined 578 figurines in app. 1-2 as JPFs, and they will
serve as our basic data-base for any further discussion.
These figurines include 150 hand-made heads of type A,
183 moulded heads of type B and 245 body parts of types
C.I-C.3. With the addition to app. 2, the total is 854, of
which there are 198 hand-made heads, 208 moulded heads
and 448 body parts.
111.6. Comparison to the Holland-
Engle Typologies
Having established the present typology, I will comment
briefly on its relation to the former main typologies of
Holland and Engle.
ID.6.1. The Relation between the Typologies
of Holland and Engle
Engle claimed that his typology corresponded well to
Holland's typology, but keys 5-6 and fig. 3b (below) prove
otherwise. Almost all of Engle's types were spread among
several of Holland's types. Furthermore, each of Holland's
types has more sub-types, which are different (not detailed
in fig. 3b below). For example, Engle's type III is scattered
among seven types and sub-types of Holland's, 16 and Engle's
type V is scattered among ten of.Holland's types and sub-
types.!? The 15 specimens of Engle's type VII seem, at a
first glance, to accord well with Holland's type All, but
actually they are scattered among 6 sub-types (Holland
1975: types AII.a, Allc, AII.d, A.lI.e, AIl.h, A.lLi).
15 There are also differences of size between the larger JPFs and
the smaller riders' bases, but I have not used these for the
classification of the fragments.
16 Holland's types AII.a, All.h, AN.a, AN.b, AN.d, AVll.a,
AVll.b.
17 These are: All.a, All.c, All.d, Am.b, AVI.a, AVI.c, AVI.d,
kVle, AIX, AXil.
There is no clear correlation between the two systems, and
that of Holland is much better, being more detailed and
encompassing a larger number of figurines. Therefore,
Engle's eye types can only be added as a secondary
component, but cannot form the base of an independent
typology.
ID.6.2. Holland's Typology compared
with the Present Work
359 figurines were included in app. 1-2 (below) from
Holland's types All-AX In fact, included are all the
specimens from Holland's types Al.a-g, All, AlII, AIY.a-
d, AV, AVI.b, AVI.e; AVII; A VIII; AIX; AXb; and
AX.c (except five specimensj.P The following types are
partially included: ALi (3 of 12); AIV.e (4 of 7); AVI.a,
AVI.d; AXa (5 of 12); AX.i (1 of 2) and most of AX!
(except fragments which cannot be clearly classified).
None of the figurines from Holland's types ALi, k, 1; AIV.f,
g, h; AVI.b; AX.d-h; AX!I-AXVII was included in my
JPFs corpus (but appear in app. 4-5, of course). The
classification was done strictly by form, and never according
to geographic considerations. The figurines which were
excluded are typologically different, to a substantial degree,
from the JPFs. Details and discussion for each case are
presented in the appendixes.
There is thus no good correlation between my typology and
that of Holland, despite the mutual basic principles
(typology based on hairdress styles: the number of rows and
shape of curls for moulded heads; applied additions for
hand-made heads). The reason for the lack of correlation is
the mixing of different types in Holland's type A (types that
I do not define as JPFs). For example, in Holland's typology
figurines from Megiddo or Buseirah can be put with JPFs, if
they have the same number and shape of curls, but
18 These are Holland'sAll.d2, AIX.b.l, AX.bA8, AX.c.1-2.
39
are basically different in every other aspect.
In a few cases, I have classified figurines differently to
Holland (usually after seeing the figurines themselves; see
app. 2: nos. 57, 72, 73, 79, 144 167, 308, etc.). In two
cases, Holland mistook two different photographs of the
same figurine as two different figurines (Holland 1975,
figurines AIII.b.2=AII.e.3; AIV.e.2=AVI.a.3). Engle used
this as an argument against Holland's whole typology, but
this was unjust. These are only simple errors, that are
bound to happen in every study of such a magnitude. The
blame lies in bad photographs and inadequate textual
descriptions. It surely does not imply a basic fault in the
typology of Holland.
ID.6.3. Engle's Typology compared with
the Present Work
I have rejected Engle's typology, and it has no apparent
correlation with my typology. There are 146 figurines in the
JPFs' corpus (app. 1-2 below), which appear in Engle's
work, including all his types I-VI, most of his type VII and
very few of his foreign type VIII (app. 1-2: nos. 11,86, 161,
which seemed to be "kosher" JPFs to me). I have not
included Engle's figurines 1:6, VII:4, since their origins are
unknown. Another figurine which was not included is
Engle's VI:6, which he saw in the [now closed] Beer-Sheba
Museum, but gave no registration number. I assume that it
is a figurine from Aharoni's excavations at Tel Beer Sheba,
already included in my catalogue. Excluded are a few other
figurines, which seemed to be mistakn classifications.l?
Most of Engle's type VIII is included in app. 4-5. To sum
up, Engle dealt with only 146 JPFs, which form about a
quarter of the JPFs known today (in app. 1-2), or only a
sixth (including the addition of app. 2).
19 Engle's type Vll:37 looks very different to a JPF. His Vll:40,
Vll:42 have ears, and should have been defined as his "foreign"
type VllI. Figurine Vll:36 is a plaque figurine, wrongly classified
by Engle. It does appear in Holland's work, where it should be,
among the plaque figurines (Holland's type C.IX.g.9).

Chapter IV: The Chronology
"The psychoanalyst, like the archaeologist in his excavations," the WolfMan recalled Freud telling him, "must uncover layer
after layer ofthe patient psyche, before coming to the deepest, most valuable treasures"
(Gray, P. 1989. in: Sigmund Freud and Art. ed. L. Gamwell and R Wells. New York 16).
IV.t. The Data
The dates of the archaeological phases and levels of the
Judean sites were discussed in chap. 1.3 - 1.4 (above). The
dating of each JPF was investigated carefully and registered
in appendixes 1-2. There is no need to repeat the technical
details of dating here. I was very careful in dating the
figurines, perhaps too careful, but caution is surely better
then adopting "exact" dates which lack solid archaeological
evidence. Only 251 of the 578 JPFs have any dating data
(app. 1: field "date"), i.e., ca. 43.6% of the total corpus
(excluding figurines 614-854 in the addition to app. 2).1
All the rest of the JPFs lack clear stratigraphy, having been
found on the surface, in earth debris, on slopes outside the
settlements, and in varied secondary contexts (such as late
building fills and pits). It is suffice to cite a few examples.
Kenyon's excavations at Jerusalem produced a very large
assemblage of JPFs, but only a small part of it is securely
dated. Most of the figurines were found in a secondary, or
late contexts (such as "Early Jewish Iron Age Ic-Id" , cf.
Jerusalem 1:2). This is, of course, not through any fault of
the excavators. In Tel en-Nasbeh, the levels and sub-phases
of the Iron Age were not distinguished well, and today it is
hopeless to try and date exactly many of the figurines, since
one cannot date exactly even whole rooms and houses (cf.
Zorn 1993). We begin the study of chronology with the
already much reduced data base of 251 JPFs (fig. 12 below).
IV.2. The Early and the Late
IV.2.1. Early dating
(10th - 9th centuries BC)
In the past, many scholars claimed that pillar-figurines
appeared already in the 10th century BC (e.g., Pilz
1924:140, 161; Pritchard 1943:57; TBM 11I:69; AS V:155,
n.28). In many cases, the early-dated figurines were not
JPFs according to my definition. In other cases, the dating
was not based on sound archaeological contexts. Early
dating of the JPFs continued to be popular and is found even
today (Keisan I: 346, #BIb; Engle 1979:20f; Winter
1983:107; Lachish V:16; Bloch-Smith 1992:219 n.17).
According to the present data (app. 1-2), this view must be
questioned. One can count on the fingers the number of
"early" figurines dated to the 10th century BC. To be more
precise, we are dealing with fragments of figurines (see app.
I 297 JPFs have some registration in the Locus field, and 191 in
the square field - perhaps since squares were not used in all the
early excavations (cf app. 1).
40
2: nos. 33, 98, 276, 598,600).2 A few other JPFs' fragments
were dated to the 9th century BC (app. 2: nos. 99, 187, 188,
280. Add, maybe, no. 457 from Arad).
To be honest, we cannot differentiate the 10th century from
the 9th century BC in Judah. There is a growing tendency
to lower the dates of levels which were dated to the 10th
century BC, to the 9th century BC (e.g., Jericke 1992:219
n.17 for Tel Beer Sheba V; for the Negev in general cf.
Na'aman 1992b:83; Haiman 1994:59-61).3 In some cases,
there are doubts regarding the archaeological stratigraphy of
early dated JPFs. For example, it is clear that Grant hardly
understood the Iron Age levels at Beth Shemesh; Wright did
a marvellous post-mortem analysis - but of finds from one
area only (AS V). As a result of the careless excavations, we
cannot date securely many JPFs from Beth Shemesh, since
most of the loci are mixed. In Arad the registration of the
loci is usually clear, but scholars debate about the
chronology of the Iron Age levels (Herzog 1984; 1987;
Mazar and Netzer 1986; Ussishkin 1988).
The stratigraphy of excavators should be respected, unless
there is solid evidence to the contrary. In any case, the
amount of "early" dated JPFs is so meager, that their
importance is negligible. The JPFs are recognized as a
common, substantial phenomenon starting with the 8th
centuryBC.
IV.2.2. Post Iron Age dating
Only two JPFs have been dated to the Persian period (nos.'
185, 482), but they are exceptional in other ways as well.
The head from Tel Michal (app. 2:482) is probably hollow,
and thus belonged to one of the coastal types and not to the
JPFs. It was found in an area which had remains of the
Persian period, but actually its archaeological context is not
clear. The stratification of the Tel Erani head (app. 2:185 )
was not published.
A certain continuation in the use of the JPFs into the sixth
century BC is possible, since surely the destruction of 586
BC could not affect each and every artifact in Judah. From
an archaeological point of view, the sixth century BC
(Babylonian period) is almost a terra incognita. For
example, few of the figurines from Benjamin could have
belonged to this period, if the assumptions about the
2 No. 598 is somewhat exceptional. It was dated to the Iron Age I
period.
3 This has nothing to do with the JPFs themselves, but with
historical considerations about the campaign of Shishak (for the
Negev). In other areas, it is the debate about the united Israelite
kingdomand the so-called "myth" of king Solomon.
peaceful continuation in the area between the Iron Age and
the Babylonian period are correct (chap. 1.3.2 above). Zorn
(1993) dated some loci from Tel en-Nasbeh, in which JPFs
were found, to a "Babylonian-Persian" level (cf. app. 2:
nos. 126, 138, 148, 152?, 171?, 172?). It must be pointed
out that these loci are often mixed, and that Zorn could not
date artifacts with certainty to specific sub-phases within the
Iron Age. Nor could Zorn (1993:967) present coherent,
detailed building plans for each phase, though not through
any fault of his own.
During the Persian period, a totally different picture
emerges. New forms of figurines appear, many of which
show clear Aegean or Persian motifs. A new technique of
double-moulding of hollow figurines becomes common.
Most of the figurines are found outside settlements, in pits
or favissae. The distribution patterns are very different from
the Iron Age: the large assemblages of figurines are found
outside Judah, along the coast (Stern 1992:159-174; Stern
1989). It would be safe to conclude that the JPFs went out of
use before the Persian period, presumably ca. 586 BC. This
conclusion is based on the meager number of JPFs which
can be dated later than 586 BC, and on the great changes
that occurred in the typology, context and distribution of
figurines in the land of Israel after 586 BC.
IV.3. 8th-7th Centuries BC
Many JPFs cannot be dated accurately, except a general
dating to the Iron Age II (15 figurines, including a few from
mixed loci). 4 I defined the date of not less than 84 JPFs as
tentatively 8th-7th centuries BC, since their contexts are not
secure. Included here are 33 figurines which probably date
to the 8th century BC and 36 figurines which probably date
to the 7th century BC (fig. 12: rows "8?", "17"). 15 other
figurines can only be dated tentatively to both these
centuries (fig. 12: row "8-7?").
I.
Despite this, there is do doubt in the dating of the JPFs to
the 8th-7th centuries BC. This is based on the secure dating
of 143 JPFs (fig. 12, row "total secure"). The next question
is, can we separate the JPFs of the 8th century BC from
those of the 7th century BC? It is not an easy task. Many of
the JPFs were found in early excavations, when the
separation of the two centuries was not yet possible. In
some areas, such as the Judean Desert and the Judean
I mountains, it is difficult to separate the centuries even today,
presumably because Sennacherib's campaign in 701 BC was
not very destructive in these areas (chap. 1.3.1 above).
Scholars usually thought that there was no chronological
pattern within the JPFs, or avoided this question completely.
Few scholars made some suggestions (Barkay 1990; Engle
1979),5 but only in a tentative way.
4 Mixed loci appear as "mix" in field "date" of app. 1. Of course,
this does not mean anything in regard to their dates. Among the 15
"Iron Age II" figurines, I have included also the 4 fragments from
Bethel.
5 Engle(1979:20f) claimed that his type I may be early and type V
later; but his typology is problematic (chapter ill.6 above). There
41
53 of the securely-dated 143 JPFs can be dated only
generally to both the 8th and the 7th centuries BC. Only 90
JPFs could be clearly dated to one specific century, and most
of these are from the 8th century BC (70 JPFs). It is clear
that the JPFs were very popular by then, unlike the inscribed
weights and the rosette stamps, which are basically from the
7th century BC (KIetter 1991; KIetter in press A). Only 20
JPFs were dated to the 7th century BC, somewhat
surprisingly. The pillar-figurines of neighboring Phoenicia,
Transjordan and Philistia also belong mostly to the 8th-7th
centuries BC. An indication for this can be seen in the area
of the Kingdom of Israel, where many sites suffered
destruction during the Assyrian conquests of 732-730 and
720 BC. Very few pillar-figurines were found in large
Israelite sites that had been destroyed in the 8th century BC
and not reoccupied to a large extent later (the best example
is Hazor). On the other hand, relatively large assemblages
of pillar-figurines were found in sites that prospered in the
7th century BC (e.g., Samaria and Megiddo). Of course,
these are not JPFs.6
Regarding sub-type distributions, the moulded (B) heads are
dominant in the 8th century BC (31 specimens). The hand-
made (A) heads clearly existed then, but in fewer numbers
(6 specimens). 13 body fragments exhibit remains of a peg
or depressions for a peg, i.e., they once had B heads. 8 of
them are dated to the 8th century BC. 7 In the 7th century
BC there is a continuation of type B, but a slight dominance
of type A. There may be varied explanations for the
differences between the centuries, e.g., that the hand-made
heads were cheaper (fitting the less wealthy 7th century BC
in Judah), or that this is a question of individual taste (a
"fashion"). Since the numbers of securely dated JPFs
available for comparison are limited (especially for the 7th
century BC), the differences may be purely accidental.
IVA. Amended Dating Data
The archaeological dating data can be improved to a certain
degree. If a specific site existed only in one century (either
the 7th or the 8th) but not in both, then all the JPFs found in
this site may be accurately dated, even if they lack clear
archaeological stratigraphy. This is a very mixed blessing,
since one-period sites are few. We do find 8th century Be
sites which were destroyed in 701 BC and left unoccupied
is no real archaeological proof for chronological differences
between his two types. Engle also relied on doubtful dating, made
in someexcavations.
6 For example, there are no pillar figurines in the relatively early
graves in Samaria, but there are many in later loci (such as .207;
Samaria ill:72). In Ashdod, most of the Iron Age figurines belong
to later levels of the 8th-7th centuries Be (AshdodII-ill: 135).
7 The 13 are app. 2: nos. 29, 182, 215, 222, 269. 271, 297, 387,
403, 420, 457, 477, 578. There are many more, no doubt, but the
published data is incomplete. Sometimesthe lack of peg can show
that a body had a hand-made, type A, head (e.g., app. 2: 31, 360,
361,384).
(or almost unoccupied) later, mainly in the Shephelah.f The
main sites are Tel Beit Mirsirn, Beth Shemesh and Tel Halif
(Lahav). One can add Tel Beer Sheba in the Negev. It is safe
to assume that all the JPFs from these sites are from the 8th
century BC at the latest. There are also sites where the JPFs
can be dated to the seventh century BC, though these are
fewer in number (mainly sites in the Negev, such as Tel
Malhata, Tel Masos and Tel Ira). Areas such as the Judean
Mountains, the Judean Desert and Benjamin did not suffer
violent destruction during Sennacherib's campaign. These
areas would be "late-biased", i.e, their material finds would
mainly point towards the 7th century BC.9 Unfortunately,
there is no way to translate this conclusion into absolute
numbers. It is impossible to say which figurine in the rich
JPFs' assemblages of sites like Jerusalem, Tel en-Nasbeh
and Gibeon is "early", and which is "late" .. Most of these
figurines can only be dated generally to the 8th-7th centuries
BC.
I have presented the amended dating evidence in fig. 13
(below). As earlier or later dating can now be safely ruled
out, I will discuss only the 8th and 7th centuries BC. The
amendment of the data increased our knowledge about the
8th century BC (127 dated JPFs, fig. 13), and showed again
the prominence of type B during this period. It made very
8 On the settlement deterioration in the Shephelah after 70I Be
see Dagan 1992:259-263; Na'aman 1993:113f, with further
bibliography.
9 Following the archaeological rules that most of the fmds belong
to the later years of each level, and that violent destruction of a
level leaves a higher nwnber of fmds than peacefulabandonment.
42
little change for the 7th century BC (only 24 dated JPFs).
Thus, the main problem remains; without a large
assemblage from each century, inter-comparison cannot be
made.
I hasten to stress that the relatively small number of well
dated JPFs from the 7th century BC should not be taken as
evidence for a substantial change in the manufacture or use
of the figurines. Of course, it should not be related with any
"cult reform" in a simplistic manner. The differences
between the phases are quantitative, and not necessarily
qualitative. Most of the JPFs were found in the northern
Judean Mountains, where it is almost impossible to
distinguish between the 8th and the 7th centuries BC
(above). As for the Judean Shephelah, the decline in the
numbers of JPFs in the 7th century BC may be a result of
the general population decline there.
It is not clear why so few body fragments are dated to the
7th century BC, but since the heads required bodies, it must
be accidental. Certain regional differences are apparent in
some of the variations of JPFs' heads, but matching
chronological evidence is not apparent. These regional
differences are further discussed in chaps. V.4.2, VI.2.3
(below).
Chapter V: Distribution Patterns
and the Relation with the Borders of Judah
"Einen Stiefelvoll Him
in den Regen geste/t:
Es wird ein gehn sein, ein grosses,
weit Iiber die Grenzen
die sie uns Ziehen"
(paul Celan, from: 'Zeitgehoft', 1976).
V.I. The Borders of Judah and the
"Heartland" Conception
V.1.1. The Borders of Judah
between 701-586 BCI
The borders of Judah had been more or less stable since the
reign of Asa until 701 BC (Kings 15:16-20; cf. Kallai 1960;
Mazar, Amit and l11an 1984; Aharoni 1987; Na'aman
1989:19, 54-55). Judah's northern border passed between
Jericho - Mizpah (Tell en-Nasbeh; Aharoni 1958; Kallai
1960; 1986). Its eastern border, the Dead Sea, as well as its
southern border, the Arad - Beer-Sheba valleys, were natural
borders. Jericho belonged to Israel (Weippert, M. and H.
1976), and the border passed south of it, but probably north
of Vered Jericho (Eitan 1984; 1994). These borders
remained more or less stable, though Judah had some
periods of expansion eastwards and southwards: it ruled
Edom until the days of Jehoram, son of Jehoshafat. Later it
struggled for the control of the Arabah and Elat (Na'aman
1987b:214-216, with references). The Chronicler claimed
that Abiyah conquered southern Samaria (Chr. 2:13), but
the historicity of this event is doubtful (Klein 1983, vs. Jones
1994; Deboys 1990). Formerly, it was thought that Judah
expanded greatly under Uziah, who was equated with a
Syrian king named Azariah; but Na'aman (1974) showed
that this equation was baseless.
The western border of Judah was the most unstable of its
borders. It passed in the Shephelah, encompassing the
Judean cities of Beth Shemesh (Na'aman 1987b), 'Azeqa
(Na'aman 1974; 1994; against Galil 1992b:117; 1995) and
Lachish (Lachish III; Ussishkin 1977; 1983). Gezer
belonged to Israel and later to the Assyrian province of
Samaria (Na'aman 1986:7, 10; 1988:74; 1987b:211). The
identification of sites in the southern Shephelah is a well
known problem, but an approximate border can be deduced
with the help of geographic features and settlement patterns
(Gophna 1981; Dagan 1992). It is clear that Ekron and Gat
belonged to Philistia (Dothan and Gitin 1987; 1994; Gitin
1989; 1990; 1993; 1995; Dagan 1992:34-41).
Hezekiah expanded outside (west) of Judah's "traditional"
border in the Shephelah. The exact extent of his expansion
1 ThiS is
. a shortened version of a forthcoming paper (Kletter in
press A).
43
is not clear. Mittmann (1990) suggested a maximalist view,
according to which Hezekiah annexed Ekron and a large
part of the territory of Ashdod. Ashkelon and its Jaffa-Azor
enclave probably became part of the anti-Assyrian alliance.
Hezekiah may have achieved control over Gat as well
(Na'aman 1979:67; 1974:27; but more likely Ekron was
concerned here instead: Mittrnann 1990:98f).
The archaeological evidence, especially the distribution of
the Judean /m/k stamps, strengthens the picture of Judean
control in Ekron, and perhaps also in Gezer (Na'aman
1974:35; 1979:75-76; 1986:10-11; 1988:74; Rainey 1983:
15; cf. also Shavit 1992:34ff, 140ff; Kempinski 1993b:178-
180).
After his campaign, Sennacherib tore areas from Judah and
delivered them to the rule of Ashdod, Gaza and Ekron. The
exact extent of these areas is not clear. Formerly, scholars
thought that most of Judah had been affected, leaving only a
small enclave around Jerusalem and Bethlehem (Alt
1930:242-243; Noth 1960:268-269). It now seems that only
the Shephelah, or parts of it, were lost (Na'aman 1979:83;
1986:17; Mittrnann 1990:104; Rainey 1983; Galil 1988:11
n.35; cf. Dagan 1992:260-262). The centralization of the
oil industry at 7th century BC Ekron may also reflect the
loss of oil producing areas in the Judean Shephelah (Dothan
and Gitin 1987; Gitin 1989; 1990; Eitam 1990; Finkelstein
1993:64). Gezer probably returned to Assyrian hands (Reich
and Brandl 1985; Becking 1992:114-118).
Historical sources on Judah's borders during most of the
''pax Assyriaca" period (700-630/620 BC) are lacking (cf.
chap. 1.2.2). Many scholars believe that Manasseh reclaimed
the areas lost in the west in 701 BC (Ginsberg 1950;
Bulbach 1981; Tatum 1991; Lowery 1991:169; Finkelstein
1993:64; Rainey 1993:160-162). This reconstruction is
based, to a large extent, on accepting the Chronicler's story
about the repentance of Manasseh (II Chr. 33:10-17; against
which see chap. 1.2.2 above). It is also plausible that the
return to the "traditional" border was achieved later, by
Josiah, contemporary with the Assyrian withdrawal from the
west (Na'aman 1989:85).
According to a very common view, Josiah conquered vast
areas of the land of Israel and established a kind of a "mini -
empire" (for the latest adherents to this view see Galil
1992b; Weinfeld 1992:146; Stern 1994; Suzuki 1992:32-37;
Laato 1992:76). This theory is based on an early date for
the Assyrian withdrawal from the west, while following the
Chronicles' version about the geographical extent of Josiah's
reform (II Chr. 34). Since the Chronicler's version should
be rejected (Chap. 1.2.3 above), it seems that Josiah
expanded only into the southern part of Samaria, to the
region of Bethel (following II Kings 23:15).2 The death of
Josiah at Megiddo (II Kings 23:29, cf. chap. 1.2.4 above)
does not imply Judean rule there.
A central source in the debate about the kingdom of Josiah
is the town list of Judah (Joshua 15; for the basic treatment
see Alt 1925b; for a thorough recent discussion see Na'aman
1989). The geographical scope of this list fits well a small
kingdom of Josiah, and the dating of the list to his reign is
based on the appearance of Bethel, Ophra and Jericho in the
list: Judah controlled these cities only during Josiah's reign
(Na'aman 1989). The dating of Garfinkel (1987; cf. Galil
1987; Ahituv 1994) is not convincing.
Archaeological remains have been seen as proof of the
"empire" of Josiah, especially since the excavation at Mesad
Hashavyahu in the 1960's. This one-period coastal site was
explained as a Judean fort of Josiah (Naveh 1962; Reich
1989), leading to the conclusion that Josiah controlled
access to the sea and parts of the coastal plain of Philistia
(for criticism see Na'aman 1989:56-57, 00.147-8). Recently,
Wenning lowered the date of Mesad Hashavyahu to around
600 BC, following lower dating of the East-Greek pottery
found at this site (1989:183-189, cf. Dion 1992:86-88,
n.103, Waldbaum 1994:59). If true, the fort had nothing to
do with Josiah.3 Wenning (1989:189fi) suggested that king
Jehoiakim ruled it, but in view of the weak position of
Jehoiakim (who is featured in the Bible as a subservient
king to Egypt and Babylon, II Kings 24:1), it is hard to
accept this suggestion.
Different reconstructions of Judah's borders can be made for
the period between 609-586 BC. The archaeological and
historical evidence from this period indicates no great
changes in the borders. In the Shephelah, Lachish and
'Azeqa remained in Judah (Jeremiah 34:7 and the Lachish
ostraca). So did En Gedi in the east and Arad in the south
(the Arad ostraca, Aharoni 1981).
Certain areas were perhaps torn away from Judah, but only
during its very last days. The loss of Bethel - Benjamin to
Babylon, and the Negev to Edom, are likely candidates; yet
there is no clear evidence for this (Malamat 1982; 1988;
Na'aman 1992; Wiseman 1985; Beit Arieh 1995:310-315).
Edomites perhaps infiltrated into the Judean Negev at the
very end. This is seen from the Edomite site at Qitmit (Beit
Arieh 1987; 1989; 1995); the shrine at En-Hazevah (Cohen
2 II Kings 23:19 mentions a reform throughout "the cities of
Samaria", but the historicity of this verse is doubtful (Na'aman
1989:55, n. 138; Ahlstrom 1993:752,763-766).
3 Wenning did not discuss the erection date of this fort, which,
from a theoretical point of view, can easily be 20 or 30 years
earlier than its end. In any case, it would be historically
impossible to claim that Mesad Hashavyahu remained in Judean
hands from Josiah until ca. 600 Be without interruption. The
ostraca from the site cannot date it exactly (Young 1992; Dobbs-
Allsopp 1994, with furtherreference).
44
and Yisrael 1995); the appearance of Edomite pottery in the
Negev (Mazar, E. 1985) and written evidences (e.g., in the
Arad ostraca: Aharoni 1981: nos. 24:20; 40:15).
V.l.2. The Danger of Circular Arguments
and the "Heartland of Judah"
As the historical evidence regarding the borders of Judah
during the late Iron Age period is often partial or obscure,
the use of archaeological information as a filler for historical
lacunae is inevitable. The binding of these two disciplines
together carries the danger of tautological, or circular,
arguments (fig. 14).
One danger is related to the assumption that material
remains can indicate political borders (fig. 14: the fourth
clause). This question has not been explored much in the
archaeological theory of the last 30 years or so. Throughout
this period, the so-called new archaeology emphasized the
lack of correlation between what was called "pots and
people" (e.g., Renfrew 1984; Clarke 1968). Many
archaeologists stressed social changes and conceptions about
frontiers and peripheries, and not the study of actual border
lines. There was also a tendency to ignore historical periods
and historical sources. The focus was put on ethnicity,
which is hard to define (Green and Perlman 1985; Hodder
1982; 1986; Rowlands et. al. 1987; Renfrew and Cherry
1986, etc.).
If one shifts the focus from "people" as ethnic units to
"polities" or political units, the relations between artifacts
and political borders must be implored. Borders are
important for a wide range of purposes: political
(maintaining relations with neighboring polities), military
(declaring wars, border disputes, etc.), and economic
(taxation, return of refugees, trade relations, etc.). Many
ancient Near Eastern sources indicate the importance of
political borders and the great care taken in establishing and
maintaining them. Ideological conceptions regarding
borders were also very clear (see esp. Liverani 1990), and in
fact universal, from third millennium BC Mesopotamia
(e.g., Cooper 1983) to the first millennium BC Biblical
sources (e.g., Na'aman 1986b). I have dealt with the
relations between artifacts and polities elsewhere (Kletter in
press A), and will not repeat the details. The main
conclusion is that archaeology can ,indicate political borders
with the help of historical sources. At the same time, each
polity and each artifact must be studied on its own merits:
there are no "covering laws".
It is more specific to our case that the danger of circularity
exists if we do not pay close attention to the definition of
Judah in the first and second sentences (in fig. 14). How are
the borders of Judah defined there - the very same borders,
that we try to define later (in the fourth sentence offig. 14)?
Historical sources are the means to overcome this difficulty.
This is not an easy process, since the interpretation of the
historical evidence is disputed; but it is not possible to rely
solely on archaeological evidence. One must first state an
opinion about the historical sources independently (chap.
1.3, V.U above). One should also remember that
archaeology and history are only a modern dichotomy of
only one past: even the dating of archaeological strata is
dependent upon historical evidence, e.g., the 701 and 586
destruction horizons.
Another working solution involves the geographical
conception of the "heartland of Judah".4 This is the area
that was always under Judean control, i.e., a minimal
definition. Inside this area, Judean population was the
overwhelming part of the entire population, and political
control was wielded by Judeans. The heartland of Judah
included the Judean mountains, Benjamin, the Judean desert
and the Biblical Negev. Clearly, Transjordan, Northern
Israel, Phoenicia and Philistia had never been a true part of
Judah. Only the Shephelah presents a problem, due to the
unstable border in this area (chap. V.l above). One can
separate it into two parts. The eastern Shephelah is safely
attributed to the heartland of Judah (Tel Beit Mirsim, Tel
Halif, Tel ej-Judeideh, etc). We have historic evidence for
the Judean political affiliation of other sites there (Lachish,
Azeka and Beth Shemesh). The western Shephelah (Gat,
Ekron) is ascribed to Philistia. A marginal zone remains,
where the affiliation of sites such as Kh. Hoga, Tell Erani
and Tell Burna is left open for the meantime (Kletter in
press A: map 3).
The conception of the heartland of Judah is far from being
perfect, and is used only as a working tool. The idea is that
this conception may help in the definition of artifacts as
Judean: even if Judah expanded outside its heartland, it
would only strengthen a definition of artifacts as Judean
(leaving less of them outside Judah). On the other hand, it
seems that Judah never lost this heartland, except perhaps in
its very latest days.
V.2. The JPFs and Judah
V.2.1. The JPFs inside Judah
In order to achieve the maximal database, I have discussed
here all the JPFs, including the addition to app. 2 (nos. 579-
854). The distribution is presented in a table (fig. 15) and a
map (fig. 16). The table is arranged by geographic regions,
with an alphabetic order of sites within each region. In total,
854 JPFs were found in 42 sites. The vast majority were
found in the Judean mountains: 628 figurines (or 75.3% of
all JPFs).5 The Judean Shephelah comes next with 126 JPFs
(or 14.8%), and third the Negev (89 JPFs, or 10.4%). These
are the only areas in which a significant quantity of JPFs has
been found. The coastal plain (philistia) yielded only 4
4 This is surely not a new concept - it was used in different
contexts (e.g., the kernel defmition ofAlt 1925:159; 1930:222).
5 This number includes the 4 fragments from Bethel, app. 2:3-6.
Their classification is not certain.
45
JPFs, and the northern part of Israel only 7 JPFs (in
accordance, ca. 0.5%, 0.8% of all the JPFs).
If we adopt the heartland of Judah concept as base for our
discussion, then 822 JPFs (ca. 96%) were found within this
area. This number is so high, that there is only one possible
conclusion: the JPFs are Judean figurines, found in the
kingdom of Judah. This conclusion is not merely possible, it
is necessary. The distribution picture is so clear, that even if
we misjudged a few sites in regard to the definition of the
heartland of Judah, it matters little. Outside Judah, almost
no JPFs were found, i.e., in the kingdoms of Israel,
Phoenicia, Philistia and Transjordan (below). Local figurine
assemblages appear in all these areas, and this also
strengthens the conclusion above.
To sum up, the JPFs (as classified here) are Judean. These
figurines were manufactured and used by Judeans in Judah,
though this does not necessarily mean each and every
figurine: a few could have been used outside Judah by non-
Judeans (see below). Again, the reader should remember
that I am speaking about Judah and the Judeans here as
political (and not ethnic) entities.
V.2.2. The JPFs Outside Judah
Outside Judah (as defined above) only 32 JPFs were found
(ca. 4% of the whole corpus). A great many of these 32
figurines are really cases of doubtful classification, but I
have nevertheless included them in the catalogue. This was
done to overcome any suspicion of begging the question by
excluding finds which do not fit the theory, by defining
them as "exceptional". But doubts do exist.
Of the 32 JPFs outside Judah, there are 4 doubtful fragments
from Bethel, which cannot be classified due to lack of
information (app. 2:3-6). One head from Tel Michal (no.
482) is probably a hollow head, part of the typical coastal
figurine types (app. 5). Unfortunately, the report is not
specific in regard to this head, and its location today is
unknown. Two body fragments from Samaria (app. 2:147,
293) do not look like JPFs, but like northern figurines of
females with long side-locks, reaching the shoulders. The
body fragment from Tel Qasilah (app. 2:280) is exceptional
in form, holding an object with both hands (a drum?). One
of the Shechem heads (no. 337) does not look like a regular
JPF. The figurine from Tel el-Oreimeh, my type Be, has a
hollow, wheel-made body (no. 183, defined as type Be and
discussed in chapter III above). One head from Megiddo
was defined as a JPF, but it lacks archaeological context and
the quality of the published photograph is low. Apart from
these, we are left with figurines from Ashdod, Tel el-
Oreimeh, Kh. Hoga and Tel es-Safi (App. 2: nos. 2,68, 181,
182).6
6 A few other fragments, that could not be defined clearly, are
included in app. 4-5. Theoretically, it is possible that some ofthese
are JPFs, but evenso it would not change the general picture.
These figurines are scattered as isolated "foreign" artifacts
inside large assemblages of figurines, which are of local
types (see app. 4-5 and chap. III). The same is true for sites
like Megiddo, Ashdod, or Samaria; the JPFs are an
exception there.
In the Coastal Plain, Northern Israel and Southern
Phoenicia, the number of JPFs is meager (11 figurines in
total), even if we disregard the doubts concerning the
identification of a few of these. Thus, these figurines cannot
testify on any significant trade or cultural influence, not to
speak of political domination and conquest (for trade in
Israel under Assyrian rule see Elat 1977; 1990). The
figurines could have reached these areas in varied ways:
through Judeans traveling abroad, by small-scale
immigration of individuals and families, or as "mementos"
brought from Judah by local people. In any case, these few
Judean objects do not support the view about Judean
conquests in the reign of Josiah.
The picture is somewhat different in the western Shephelah.
Single JPFs were found in some sites in this area, outside
heartland Judah (e.g., at Kh. Hoga). Of course, it is possible
that "the blame" lies on the cautious definition of the
heartland area (above), and that some of these sites belonged
to Judah. In any case, the number of sites and figurines is so
small, that it has no real significance. On the other hand,
groups of JPFs were found in Gezer (7 figurines) and in Tel
Erani (8 figurines). In Gezer, there is also a large
assemblage of other types of figurines (see app. 5.III-IV),
while at Tel Erani the JPFs seem to be the dominant type of
anthropomorphic figurine. It would be hazardous to
conclude that Tel Erani belonged to Judah, and Gezer to
Israel and later to Assyria (for historical evidences on Gezer
cf. chap. V.l.l above). The evidence consisting of a few
figurine fragments is too precarious to indicate political
affiliation of sites of such magnitude. In any case, a
different explanation to that suggested for northern Israel
and the coastal plain is required for the western Shephelah.
It is possible that sites in the western Shephelah had mixed
populations, a conceivable situation for a frontier zone
between Judah, Philistia and the kingdom of Israel (later
Assyrian Samaria). Another possibility is that the JPFs
indicate cultural contacts in sites near the Judean borders.
Keeping in mind the Judean intervention in the western
Shephelah during Hezekiah's revolt, the JPFs could be some
sort of a "secondary product" of this event. Whatever the
reason, these little groups of JPFs in the western Shephelah
cannot prove any theory about Judean conquest of this area.
Trade in figurines is known from later periods in Israel
(Linder 1986). Despite this fact, I have not suggested trade
as an explanation for the occurrence of JPFs outside Judah.
First, the coastal and northern types of pillar-figurines are
more elaborate and technically superior to the JPFs. Had
there been inter-polity trade of figurines in the Iron Age II
period, one would expect it to follow the opposite direction -
into Judah. Second, there is really no evidence for such
trade, not in the form of many 'foreign' pillar-figurines
within Judah (cf. app. 4-5), nor in the form of many JPFs
outside Judah. Third, it is plausible that the JPFs had
46
religious meaning (chap. X below), which would make them
less appealing for other religions (it does not have to be very
different religions - local or national groups can reject
religious artifacts of another, quite similar, neighboring
group). The last two arguments are not decisive, but the
quantity of JPFs outside Judah is in any case too small to
sustain an explanation of trade.
V.3. Inner Judean Distribution
Pattern and Site Hierarchy
V.3.t. Main Sites and Main Sub-Types
The main sites where JPFs were found are shown in figs.
17-18 (below). Details of the main sub-types, A, B, and C
(without the addition to app. 2) are given in fig. 18. At each
of these sites, both types of heads and body fragments have
been found. More B heads - versus A heads - were
discovered at Lachish, Tel Beit Mirsim and Beth Shemesh.
The numbers are balanced, more or less, at Gibeon, Tel Beer
Sheba and Arad, whereas A heads are more prominent at
Jerusalem and Tel en-Nasbeh.
It may be a regional difference: a preference for the moulded
heads (B) in the Shephelah versus a balance, or a slight
superiority of hand-made heads (A) in the Negev and the
Judean mountains. On the other hand, perhaps it is only
random occurrence, resulting from incomplete data. There
was a tendency to publish every head in the older
excavations in the Shephelah , but many body fragments
were neglected. This happened because the heads are more
impressive in photographs or drawings. Also, scholars
believed that the JPFs were toys, without much artistic, or
symbolicvalue. For example, at Tel en-Nasbeh 19 of the 34
hand-made heads were only mentioned in an appendix (TN
I: app. A), while all the 28 moulded heads were published
adequately'? For other sites, a similar appendix is perhaps
missing, and we are left with a partly misleading picture.
Chronological factors can also be involved: the Shephelah
flourished in the 8th century BC, while the Negev flourished
in the 7th century BC (Na'aman 1987, cf. chap. 1.3 above).
V.3.2. Sites, excavated Areas,
and the Quantity of the JPFs
The relations between the quantity of the JPFs at each site,
its size and the extent of the excavated areas are shown in
fig. 19. The data about the size of sites and excavations is in
many cases an estimation. Wherever possible, I quoted the
figures from excavation reports or the EAEm.. A few
estimations were suggested verbally by the excavators, or
estimated from maps. I included sites with 5 or more JPFs,
but excluded extra-mural areas (e.g., cemeteries, settlement
quarters outside the walls, etc.; fig. 19). Whenever possible,
7 One B head lacks a photograph in the figurine plates, but
probably does appear in a separate plate.
I indicated the size of the Iron Age II levels, or the size of
excavated areas in those levels (otherwise, it is the size of
the whole site / excavation).
As expected, there is a correlation between quantities of
JPFs, size of sites and extent of excavation. It is not always a
direct relation, since many other factors are involved here,
e.g., the wealth of each site, the nature of excavated areas
within a site, the different fate of the levels and the methods
of excavation and publication. For example, a wealthy
quarter, or a violent destruction of a level, can yield many
more artifacts in comparison with poor areas and peaceful
abandonment. The small, agricultural village of Ramot is a
good example: here the relatively large quantity of JPFs does
not reflect a great size or wealth. Rather, it is the result of
cautious, modem excavation methods, detailed registration
systemand the availability of each fragment, however small,
for direct study (courtesy the excavator, A. de-Groot). Beth
Shemesh can probably illustrates the unfortunate opposite.
The 1933 season was well published by Wright (AS V), and
most of the JPFs from Beth Shemesh are from this season.
From the huge areas of Grant's former seasons in the west of
the city, very few figurines are known, certainly not because
these areas are poorer.
Different population estimates exist for ancient Near Eastern
cities, but following some common ones, one dunam of
domestic buildings was occupied by ca. 25 persons or 5.4
houses (Stager 1985:17-18; Broshi and Finkelstein 1992:48,
with further references). The total excavated area of all the
sites in fig. 19 is 140-163 dunam, while 531 JPFs have been
found in these sites." This means that one excavated dunam
yielded 3.5-3.8 JPFs in average. Some factors imply that
this average is too high. All the JPFs from burials should be
excluded, thus the JPFs' density inside settlements is lower.
Furthermore, at many sites the JPFs are separated by a few
levels (e.g., Arad and Lachish), and are not
contemporaneous. The quantity of JPFs at a certain temporal
point is therefore considerably lower. However, an exact
statistic is not possible, nor is it crucial. It does not matter
much if the average above is even doubled or halved, since
we only need a general scale of order.
At a first glance, the average reached above is quite low, and
it is tempting to conclude that there was only one JPF per
family (or per one domestic house) at any given time. Such
a conclusion would be very important, strengthening the
assumption that the JPFs represented the same figure, and
not many individual, different figures. Otherwise, we would
expect to find groups of JPFs together; whereas if all the
JPFs represented the same figure, there would be no need to
put two (or more) together in the same place. Yet, caution
is needed. First, the evidence we have is partial: many
figurines were missed, not registered or not published.
Second, the JPFs' fragments indicate disposal patterns,
rather than patterns of use (see chaps. VII, VIII below). The
conclusionabove remains tentative. In any case, the quantity
of the JPFs is not so overwhelming as was assumed by some
8 Gibeon was excluded from the average, since the JPFs there
were found in one pool.
47
scholars. The majority of the rooms and a very large
percentage of the buildings seem to have functioned without
any of these figurines.
V.3.3. Site Hierarchy
The distribution of the JPFs (figs. 17-18) can teach us about
site hierarchy and regional diversity inside the kingdom of
Judah. The assumption that the quantities of JPFs indicate
wealth and importance of sites is, of course, simplistic.
Again, we can overcome these limitations by treating the
statistic as a very general, tentative picture.
Regarding geographic regions first, the northern Judean
mountains are very dominant. The southern Judeari
mountains (south of Bethlehem, until the Negev) appear
almost blank on the distribution map (fig. 16). Even Hebron,
a central site in this region, is disappointing (despite the
excavations, Ofer 1990b:203-204; Chadwick 1992). This
area was poorer than the northern mountains, and the
number and size of excavated areas are smaller. The Judean
Desert is also poorly represented, probably since it was a
marginal area for settlement (Bar Adon 1989; Broshi and
Finkelstein 1992:52).
Regarding site hierarchy, Jerusalem stands isolated at the
top of the distribution list, with 405 JPFs (including the
addition to app. 2). This is easy to explain on grounds of its
large physical size, its status as a capital, and the large
extent of excavated areas (fig. 17). Tel en-Nasbeh comes
second with 143 JPFs. This can be partially explained by
the large extent of excavations there and the relatively good
publication (TN 1: app. A). On the other hand, Tel en-
Nasbeh is not larger than Lachish or Tel Beit Mirsim. Its
higher quantity of JPFs may indicate a higher concentration
in the northern Judean mountains in general.
The third level in the hierarchy is occupied by 6 sites, with a
few dozen JPFs (between 23-43 at each site): Gibeon, Arad,
Tel Beer Sheba, Beth Shemesh, Lachish and Tel Beit
Mirsim. These sites can be seen as local centers of their
immediate surroundings, or as regional centers. All the sites
in this group are walled cities, except the fortress of Arad. It
is interesting that the distribution in the Shephelah is more
or less equally divided between Lachish, Beth Shemesh and
Tell Beit Mirsim (all more or less equal in size). Usually,
Lachish is considered as "the capital of the Shephelah",
according to the historical sources and its impressive
archaeological remains (e.g., Garfinkel 1984:43, 48-49 and
table 4). It is possible that Lachish was an administrative
center, while the JPFs indicate daily, "unofficial" activity
(unlike the lmlk impressions). The JPFs are perhaps better
indicators of size and population-density, while the lmlk
stamps indicate better political and administrative status.9
9 Garfinkel's studies (1984; 1985) about the "private" impressions
are problematic. First, they are not an independent phenomenon,
but are part of the lmlk corpus (Na'aman 1988:76). Second,
Garfinkel assumed direct relations between distribution and the
activity of the officials named on the seals, but all the jars were
 In the fourth level of hierarchy we find many sites, where
small JPFs' groups were found (4-12 figurines at each site).
These sites are not homogeneous. Some are small,
agricultural sites; others are big cities, that were excavated
on a small scale (or are not yet fully published). The fifth
and final level of hierarchy groups together sites in which
few JPFs had been found (1-3 figurines at each site). This
level includes the largest number of sites (21), but with the
lowest quantity of JPFs. It includes small sites, random
surface finds, burials near settlements, etc. A few large sites
are included as well, but these were little excavated (like Kh.
Rabud).
Outside Judah, the quantity of JPFs bears no relation to the
wealth and size of the sites. For example, the few JPFs in
Ashdod and Megiddo (one JPF) teach us nothing about the
settlement hierarchy of these sites. For the hierarchy of such
sites, we must study the local assemblages.
To sum up, the distribution pattern of the JPFs contributes to
the study of the site hierarchy in Judah. Most of the former
analyses were based on size of sites, or on the official lmlk
stamps. The use of other criteria for activity may contribute
to a better picture (cf. the section on Lachish above). For
example, the inscribed Judean weights (Kletter 1991) may
indicate economic activity and trade; industrial installations
may indicate manufacturing processes, while everyday
pottery vessels may indicate population density. This
subject is certainly beyond the scope of the present work.
VA. Relations between Distribution,
Date and Sub-Types
V.4.l. Distribution and Date
Since currently the exact dating of most of the JPFs is not
clear, it is too early to draw separate distribution maps of the
8th and the 7th centuries BC. The outer limits of
distribution and the relation to Judah's borders seem to be
similar in both these centuries, as the JPFs were used in all
parts of Judah. There are differences, e.g., the decline in the
stamped in the Shephelah. Third, he amalgamated Ramat Rahel
and Jerusalem, creating a severe bias in the distribution pattern.
48
Shephelah after 701 BC, but the JPFs were still in use (e.g.,
in Lachish level II). The Negev flourished in the 7th century
BC, but JPFs appear there also in the 8th century BC (e.g.,
Tel Beer Sheba). We simply do not have enough data to
study the chronological patterns of distribution.
V.4.2. Distribution and Sub-Types
The question is, whether certain subtypes of the JPFs ~e
related to a specific region of Judah, or even to a certam
group of sites? Some regional distinctions can be suggested
for the heads (the bodies are very stereotyped and do not
help much).
The hand-made JPFs' heads may be rounded or pointed at
the top, but both these forms are common and show no
difference in the distribution pattern. Other features are
more indicative. It seems that the "hammer" shape (sub-type
A.l.Ah) is common in the Negev, with 4 specimens from
Arad and Beer Sheba (app. 2: 251, 252, 475, 481 [ef. fig.
5:2]). Only one head like this was found elsewhere (app. 2:
10 from Beth Shemesh). Heads with "turbans" (type A.2)
are found only in the northern Judean mountains, at
Jerusalem (app. 2: 332, 362-365, 433), Ramat Rabel (app. 2:
117) and Tel en-Nasbeh (app. 2: 131, 137, 488-489). The
same is true for heads with "turbans" and side-locks (type
A.3), found at Jerusalem (app. 2: 333-336, 435) and Tel en-
Nasbeh (app. 2: 128, 133-136; 138), except one head from
Jericho (ibid: 71). Most of the heads with applied hats, type
A.4, were also found in the Judean Mountains (app. 2: 51-
52, 366, 369, 139-140 [cf. fig. 5:5-6]). The only exception
is one head from Tel Masos (app. 2: 241).10
The differences in distribution noted above are probably
only typological. That is, these are differences between
regional workshops, each producing some minor changes in
"design" of the JPFs. It does not seem likely that the
differences are related to separate sets of symbolism and
function, or to chronological factors. In any case, our data is
too scanty and there is no need to add speculation. I have
not mentioned the moulded (B) heads, which will be studied
separately (chap. VI.2 below).
10 The quantity of some sub-types is too small for detailed study.
Two Heads from Jerusalem were defined as type A5 Cappo 2: 367-
8), but are really quite exceptional in comparison with the other
JPFs. One head from Gibeon was defined as type A6 Cappo 2: 53),
and is even more exceptional. The classification of two other heads
from Tel en-Nasbeh (app. 2: 488-489) is not clear.
Chapter VI: Aspects of Manufacture
"Everything one was to become must have been there, for better or worse. One's future might have been
prophesized from the shape ofhouses as from the lines ofthe hand... Here in Berkhampsted was the first mould ofwhich the
shape was to be endlessly reproduced" (Graham Green. A Sort of Life: 12).
The basic study of the manufacture of the JPFs was carried
out by Kelso and Thorley (in: TBM ill: 138-141). I have
already referred to their work (chap 11.2.2 above), and need
not repeat their conclusions here.
VI.I. Aspects of Manufacture
VI.I.l. Height Measures
The measurements of whole figurines and body fragments
are listed in Field "Hal" (app. 1), while the heights of the
. heads are listed in field "Hh" (app. 1). All measurements are
in millimeters. The height of the moulded heads are
measured from the lowest point of the chin until the
beginning of the hairdress (i.e., only the face; for the reasons
for this see chap. VI.2 below). The hand-made heads are
measured from the top of the head (including applied parts)
to the lowest point of the nose. The data is presented in fig
20. It is not complete because the measurements of many
JPFs are unknown. Note that whole figurines appear twice
in fig. 20, once measured as whole figurines, then as heads
only.
So far, the size of the JPFs has not been studied, except for
some suggestions being made regarding a few figurines. For
example, the excavators at Gibeon suggested that the JPFs
vary between 8 and 14 em in height (Gibeon WS:15f).
From Fig. 20, it is clear that the type B figurines are larger
than the hand-made type A ones, both in body and in head
size. Furthermore, note that only the face is measured for
moulded JPFs in fig. 20; the whole heads are considerably
larger. There are sharp variations in the size of each sub-
type. Hand-made heads vary from between 14-40 mm,
excluding a very few exceptionally larger ones. Moulded
faces are vary from between 19-41 mm .
The measurements are important for two reasons: the study
of the moulds (below, chap. v.z) and the classification of
the figurine fragments. They can also help to separate JPFs'
type A heads from the similar rider's heads, which are
usually smaller (18 mm in average). I have not used this
difference to exclude heads from the JPFs' catalogue (app. 1-
2), because it became evident at a late stage of research, too
late a stage to change all the tables and catalogues because
ofa few items (cf. also chap. III.5.3 above).
VI.1.2. Clay and Firing
The clay of the JPFs was not well sifted, and it has a high
degree of grit and often remains of straw. It was fired in
49
relatively low temperatures, ca. 600-700 degrees Celsius. 1
This accounts well for the high fragility of the figurines. The
firing usually gave the outer surfaces a red-brown colour,
while the core remained gray or black (Gibeon WS: 15).
Early scholars believed that the material culture of Israel
was impoverished, therefore attributing any artifact with
outstanding technical or artistic qualities to foreign
countries (usually, Phoenicia or Egypt). It was suggested
then, that all the heads of the JPFs were moulded in one
center and that the moulds were foreign imports (Albright,
TMB ill:69, 83; Kelso and Thorley, ibid:139f; followed by
Patai 1967:60, n.41; Winter 1983:127; cf. Lachish III:375).
Negbi (1966) suggested a separation of figurine groups by
petrography in a pioneering study of Persian Period
figurines from Tel Sippor (for criticism cf. Keisan 1:349).
Large scale petrographic analyses of JPFs have not yet been
published. Small scale analyses seem to imply local
manufacture in each region (or even in each town), since
JPFs from Jerusalem were made from local terra-rosa clay,
while JPFs from Tel Ira in the Negev were made from local
loess clay (Kletter, in press B: nos. I, 3; here app. 2: nos.
245, 249; the petrographic tests were made by Y. Goren).
JPFs from the Shephelah have not yet been analyzed, but a
few animal Iron Age figurines from Maresha have been.
Their clay was found to be very different from that of later
figurines, and was probably local. Exact geographic origins
cannot be established yet (courtesy of A. KIoner and the
Maresha team). We also lack petrographic or neutron-
activation analyses for the few JPFs found outside Judah.
Moorey and Fleming (1984:77f, cf. Spycket 1992:227,
n.395) suggested that hand-made figurines were made in
domestic areas by women, but were careful when writing
that each case must be treated on its merits. The excavators
of Tel en-Nasbeh made a similar suggestion for all the JPFs,
because of their cheap materials and crude workmanship
(TN 1:273). This view was adopted by scholars from the
feminist school (Teubal 1990:43; Meyers 1988:161-163;
Gadon 1989:177ff, 186). The last attributed the JPFs to
women, but it seems to be based on the pre-eonception that
female figurines belong to female religion or to "female
house cult". As far as the JPFs are concerned, there is no
archaeological evidence whatsoever for this view. The
crude design (unlike other pottery vessels) does not indicate
production by women. The figurines did not have. to
withstand pressures (unlike cooking, storing and eating
vessels), and perhaps this is the reason of their "lower
manufacturing standards". The model of each woman
making her own household figurines at home can hardly be
accepted for the JPFs. It does not accord with the fact that
1 I wish to thank Y. Goren of the Israel Antiquities Authority for
this observation.
the JPFs are very homogeneous in shape. Also, the use of
moulds indicates mass manufacture at a rather high
technical level and not dispersed, domestic production.
VI.1.3. White-Wash and Painted Decorations
199 out of 578 JPFs show remains of white-wash (marked
by the sign "+" in app. 1, field "Ws").2 Probably many other
figurines were white-washed, but this was not always
mentioned in publications, e.g., at Tel en-Nasbeh (Zorn,
verbal communication). Also, The surfaces of many
figurines are so eroded, that the white-wash is no longer
present. The white-wash is found on all sub-types. Two
animal heads from the 7th century BC level at Tel Ira,
typical of Judah, were analyzed by I. Segal (fig. 21 below).3
The chemical component of the white-wash was analyzed as
CaC03, i.e., a deliberate lime wash (and not a natural
encrustation of salts). The white-wash was probably done in
order to give the figurines a light, smooth finish, facilitating
and stressing the painted decorations (cf. TMB III:106; for
Cypriote figurines, Caubet 1992:261).
It seems that most of the JPFs were decorated by paint
(Hubner 1989: 51 n.35). So far, I have found 91 JPFs with
remains of paint (App. I: field "CL"). The painting was
done by brush on the white-wash. Usually, red paint was
used (52 specimens: 14 type A, 28 type B and 10 type C).4
Yellow paint appears on 6 specimens; brown on 4 and black
on 3. White paint was reported for five figurines, but I
suspect there is some confusion with white-wash. The
decoration is often bi-chrome, red and yellow (9 specimens)
or red and black (2 specimens). The decoration is almost
always composed of simple bands on the neck, shoulders,
upper breasts and arms, probably symbolizing jewelery such
as necklaces and bracelets. The whole face is often covered
by red paint, and sometimes details of eyes, brows, and
hairdress are painted. In a few cases, yellow or brown is
used for the upper edge of the heads. More elaborate
decorations appear rarely, with the use of two or three
colours.! For example, one figurine from Gibeon has yellow
colour on the face (a mask? - thus Gibeon WS:15), yellow
coloured fingers, and alternating bands of yellow and red on
the shoulders, neck and arms (app. 2:42). Kelso and Thorley
suggested that yellow paint symbolized gold jewelery (TBM
III: 140). It is important to note that in some cases, the
painted decorations were limited to the front, and do not
continue on the back of the figurines (TBM III: 138; Gibeon
WS: 15). This leads to the conclusion that the figurines were
supposed to be seen from the front. Further proof for this is
found in the moulded (B) heads, where the back side is often
left crude (TMB III: 140; Keel and Uehlinger 1992:380).
2 In five further figurines, the nature of the wash or decoration is
not clear (app. 2: 86, 184,338,369,479).
3 The specimenswere given courtesyofI. Beit Arieh. The analyses
were done using SEM at the Geological Institute, Jerusalem.
4 Red burnish was reported for 7 specimens, but perhaps it was
confusedwith red paint.
5 Marked by code "8" in App. I: field "CL".
50
As far as can be judged at present, there are no significant
differences in the painted decoration between the various
JPFs' sub-types.
VI.1.4. The Nakedness
The lower body of the JPFs is schematic, without any
indication of sex. Perhaps it was not meant to convey
nakedness. The upper body seems to be naked, but some
scholars claim that it is hard to separate nakedness from a
transparent cloth. It seems, though, that there is not much of
a difference between the two. Figurines which have painted
decoration on the body are probably not naked (Hermary
1992:183). Furthermore, Egyptian figurines were covered
with mat-clothes (Posener-Krieger 1985; Pinch 1993:224).
Thanks to the dry climate, the clothes did not deteriorate,
otherwise leaving what would appear to be naked figurines.
There is no indication of paint on the body of the JPFs
(other than on shoulders and arms, probably signifying
jewels). Therefore it seems that at least the breasts are
presented naked.
VI.1.5. Other Aspects
The separate parts of the JPFs and their joining together
have already been described in detail (Kelso and Thorley,
TBM II: 138ff; Gibeon WS:15; Lachish III:374; Engle 1979:
11-12; Winter 1983:107). Many other questions relating to
the manufacture of the JPFs are still left open. We know that
there were at least a few centers of production, but were
there regional centers, or (more likely) local workshops at
each large site? Was the manufacture done in the usual
potter's workshops, where other clay vessels were made (this
seems reasonable)? What was the "life expectancy" of a
figurine, i.e., how many years did a figurine survive? Did it
last a short while, like average daily pottery vessels, or
more? (for a short period of use see Winter 1983:131). If
the figurines were made in the usual potter's workshops,
what were the mechanisms of marketing? Were they sold
like any other commodity, and at what "prices"? For all
these questions, the information we have at the moment
permits only speculation.
VI.2. Moulds and Moulded Heads
VI.2.I. The Moulds
Very few moulds for anthropomorphic figurines are known
from the Iron Age period in Israel. Holland counted 17
moulds of anthropomorphic figurines, mostly plaque
figurines (1975:314-317). I have counted 28 now (app.
5.VIII). Moulds for solid pillar-figurines are very rare
(Holland's type N.II.a). Only three of these moulds bear
some resemblance to the JPFs (app. 5.VIII: nos. 1, 2, 14).
The most similar is the one from Beth Shemesh, but even
this mould is not identical with any of the JPFs' heads.
A few moulds were found after 1975, but none of a JPF.6
Three moulds were found at Tel Batash in 8th century BC
contexts (app. 5.VIII: nos. 19-21), but these are not JPFs'
moulds either.
Keel and Uehlinger claimed that the lack of moulds was a
result of not finding the potter's workshops (1992), but some
workshops were excavated (Wood 1991:33fI, fig. 16).
Holland (1975:324; 1977:131) concluded that the moulds
were Judean, but this was deduced from the moulded heads,
not from moulds themselves. The lack of moulds forces us
to study the heads carefully (below).
VI.2.2. Basic Principles for the Study of
Mould-made Figurines
Kelso and Thorley were the first to discuss the technique of
the moulded JPFs heads (TBM III: 138-141). In their view,
the heads were made from a better clay than the bodies,
since this was necessary for achieving the little moulded
details (they are also better made than usual pottery vessels).
The moulds were made of clay, baked in very low
temperatures. This made the moulds more porous,
shortening the time needed for drying the heads inside them.
The slow drying process necessitated the use of many
moulds, though each mould could produce up to 200 heads
or so. Kelso and Thorely thought that one especially
beautiful JPF head was made in a bronze mould, which is
more durable but also more expensive. In bronze moulds,
the drying is quicker and thus the whole production process
is shorter. Kelso and Thorley believed that the moulds were
foreign, because of their superior quality. They noted the
phenomenon of shrinkage during production, and estimated
that a head was ca. 15% smaller than the mould in which it
was produced (TBM III: 138). Since the work of Kelso and
Thorley, little progress has been made. Scholars repeated
their conclusions, or offered short technical discussions
(e.g., Hachlili in: Ashdod II-III: 125f). Other scholars only
referred to the many difficulties in this field of study (e.g.,
Hubner 1989:50).
With this background in mind, Nicholls' study (1952) is
highly important, though it dealt with Greek figurines from
the Archaic periods. Nicholls adopted the term "group",
meaning: "pieces that resemble each other in such a way as
to suggest that they are the work of the same modeller"
(Nicholls 1952:218). Since it is hard to define the groups
exactly when dealing with ancient figurines, a larger
definition for the group is needed, i.e., figurines from the
same workshop - "a mass of material closely related
stylistically, though not always quite certainly, because it is
the work of the same modeller or, at least, of the same
workshop" (Nicholls 1952:219). The groups are composed
of "series", a technical (not stylistic) term for figurines
6 Cf. a Middle Bronze age mould (Keisan 1:350, c.2.22); a Persian
period mould from Dor (Stern 1992:60, photo 72); two moulds
from unknown origins (app. 5.VIII: nos. 11, 21) and two moulds
from Amman (ibid: nos. 6-7).
51
which come, directly or indirectly, from the same "archetype
mould", or "patrix" (see also fig. 22 belowj.?
During the manufacturing process, the first stage is the
making of an archetype figurine, from which first moulds
are made. After firing, these moulds produce the "first
generation" of figurines. So far, it is likely to be the
production of one potter or one workshop. Anyone can
produce from the figurines of the first generation more
moulds ("second generation moulds"), and from these more
figurines ("second generation figurines"). Further
generations are then possible, and Nicholls identified up to
five generations emerging from one "archetypal" mould
(1952:219-220; cf. fig. 22 below). All generations after the
first are "derivative generations", which could have been
manufactured in other workshops and from varied clays
(Nicholls 1952:221, with evidence from Greece). The
identification of the generations relies not only on style, but
also on the shrinkage of the heads when they are dried and
fired. Nicholls (1952:220 n.21, n.23) produced modern
figurines from an ancient mould, and concluded that
moulded figurines lose some 13-14% of their size with each
successive generation.
The picture is more complicated because of the "horizontal"
dimension of the series. Varied details (such as the
treatment of the hair, eyebrows and ears) were incised or
worked by hand in the moulds ("intaglio" work, or "in the
negative"), and are therefore not produced automatically in
all the figurines (Nicholls 1952:221f). This may lead to the
appearance of variations in shape of moulds and figurines,
especially after the first generation, although all of them
originated from the same archetype. The moulds of a certain
generation, with these hand-made changes, were termed by
Nicholls "parallel moulds". The whole picture of production
by moulds is, therefore, rather complex (fig. 22); not to
mention other possible factors such as bad manufacture or
distortion of the clay while it is still soft. Nicholls warned
that it is more practical to follow the main lines of
production, rather than be lost in the maze of small,
"unprofitable" details (1952:223-224).
Ammerman (1985) based a study of figurines from Medma
in Italy on the principles formulated by Nicholls: "Every
terra-cotta figurine cast from a mould holds a specific place
within a family of mechanically related mould and casts
whose ancestry can be traced back (at least theoretically) to
a common source or model" (Ammerman 1985:10). At the
same time, she was conscious of the fact that only a fraction
of the entire ancient production was found, and that a
"prototype" (Nicholls "archetype") was never identified.
Usually we would find first generation figurines and later
derivative generations (ibid: 11-12). Ammerman (1985:12)
claimed that up to 5 generations and 7 variants exist in one
mould-series from Medma, and that clay analyses indicates
an "active exchange of terracottas between Medma and her
mother and sisters colonies", up to a third of the figurines of
certain types.
7 Often, a series and a group coincide, ibid:224. Another study by
Nicholls (1970) deals with Greek figurines,but not with moulds.
Two observations of Ammerman are important. First, that
trade was likely to be in figurines, and not in moulds.
However, in the archaeological record one is likely to see
not the exchanged figurine itself, but derivative figurines
which were copied from it (through moulds taken from the
exchanged figurine). Second, that the adoption of a certain
type of figurine implied the adoption of its imagery: "for
votive terracottas, the adoption of a mould series by the
coroplasts at a new site implies that their imagery was
considered to be appropriate at some level for the cult at the
second site" (Ammerman 1985:13-14). If the Judean JPFs
were religious artifacts, it could explain the fact that they
were not copied as a mould-series outside of Judah, nor were
moulded heads from neighboring kingdoms copied in Judah
(cf. chap. Y.2.2 above).
VI.2.3. Application for the JPFs?
The principles, so well described by Nicholls, were applied
in figurine studies, mainly in the Aegean realm (Nicholls
1952:220f; Ammerman 1985; 1991:210-213; Caubet
1992:216f; Vandenabeele 1989:269f; etc.). But are they
applicable for the JPFs? So far, no trial has been made to
apply them. Scholars assumed (though often not explicitly)
that there was no chronological development within the
JPFs. Putting the matter to test is not so simple. Basic
details are missing in the early reports, and the facial details
of many heads are obscure because of inadequate
photographs or drawings. Nicholls, and other scholars who
dealt with mould production, had direct access to large
assemblages of figurines. They could check the moulded
details with their own eyes. For the JPFs, it is very hard to
collect a large assemblage of moulded heads for direct study.
In Israel, the larger museums hold not more than a dozen
JPFs each; while figurines under display cannot be removed
for long periods. The largest collection is with the Israel
Antiquities Authority, but it is devided between various
stores. Abroad, the JPFs are scattered between some 30
institutions, from the U.K. to Australia and the U.S.A. The
study of the moulds and moulded heads is important, thus at
least the central questions must be asked: How many
moulds can one identify? How many "mould-series" came
from one mould? Are there regional or temporal variations
between the moulded heads, and what can these teach us
about production, distribution and relations between the
sites? These questions may also contribute to a better
understanding of the meaning of the JPFs.
In total, 183 moulded (B) heads were found so far, but many
cannot be neatly classified into sub-types.f There are only
129 classified heads, presented in fig. 23.
Kelso and Thorley remarked that the 13 moulded heads
from Tel Beit Mirsim were made in at least 11 different
moulds; whereas only two pairs of heads were supposedly
produced in two moulds (a pair in each mould: TBM
III:139f). Due to the bad preservation state, even this was
8 These include heads without any classification, other than "B".
52
suggested very cautiously (ibid). Fig. 23 helps, at the most,
to discern the technical connections between the heads. The
minimal number of JPFs' moulds is 24, being the number of
all the sub-types (fig. 23: left column). Possibly, some of the
unclassified heads and "exceptional" heads belonged to
other moulds. Furthermore, some of the heads in the same
sub-type are clearly different from each other, in both shape
and size, to the extent that they must have been made in
different moulds. Thus, a cautious estimation ofa few dozen
moulds for all the JPFs is more than likely.? This
estimation alone signifies that we are dealing with mass-
production, of which only a small part has been discovered
so far. It also hints that the figurines were made in a
number of centers (otherwise, why would one center need so
many moulds?).
Unlike Nicholls, I had to measure the height of the moulded
heads from the chin to the beginning of the hairdress, i.e.
along the whole face. Since I was unable to check every
head, I had to define the clearest possible measure. It had to
be useful for photographs and drawings (often in small
scales), and as long as possible (for accuracy). This is not
an ideal measure, for sometimes the potter obscured the
lower chin when he joined heads to bodies. Also, the chin is
a line and not a specific point, thus less accurate for
measurements.
Were the publications full, and the data base complete, it
would have been possible to draw an accurate matrix of
heads. Then, one would easily find the mould-series and
distinguish early and late heads within each series
(according to their size). At present, the data permits only
the technical arrangement of heads from the same sub-type,
by descending size (example shown in fig. 24).
I have put the word "series" in brackets in the title of fig. 24,
since it does not represent a real series (in Nicholls'
definition). The photographs of some of these B.3.b heads
from Lachish are bad, and do not permit comparisons to
other heads in this "series". One figurine from Lachish is
exceptional- it looks different from all the other B.3.b heads
(app. 2: 86). Another figurine from Ramat Rabel is so badly
preserved, that it can not be placed in the typological
sequence with any certainty (app. 2: 120).
At a first glance, one can assume that fig. 24 indicates a
homogeneous series, with three or four generations of linked
figurines, all from the Judean mountains and the Shephelah.
But in fact, it could be a collection of figurines from
different moulds, without direct connections. The same
situation applies to the other sub-types, thus there is no point
in presenting a whole set of similar tables. Very rarely can
we make a case for direct dependence, e.g., a head from
Jericho and a head from the collections of the Hebrew
University, Jerusalem (app. 2:70 vs. app. 3:91). The shape is
clearly the same - but even in this case, the head from the
collection may be modem, based on the ancient head.
9 It is currently hard to estimate the influence of "horizontal"
variations in regard to the number of moulds, but it cannot be very
significant.
Furthermore, the location of the head from Jericho is
unknown, and it may even be the same head as that in the
collection. Working by photographs and drawings makes the
definition of mould-series almost impossible. A mistake of
no more then 15% in the height of a head, or missing one
line of curls above the forehead, will cause a misplacement
of a head in the series, or even its transference to a
completely different mould-series.
Even if the study of the mould production of the JPFs proves
unsuccessful at the moment, I hope that it paves the way for
future studies. When the importance of this subject is
realized, excavators will publish all the necessary data. Then
we will be able to judge the mould-series and the chronology
of the heads within them. We will understand better the
relations between production centers and sites, and perhaps
learn more about the origins of the moulding (below).
One feature in regard to the moulded heads has not yet been
mentioned. This is the "edge of the mould" line. The edge of
the mould, when stamped into a somewhat larger lump of
clay, leaves a line like a very shallow ridge on the heads.
This line surrounds the moulded part, but is clearest at the
top of the head, above the lines of curls. This "edge of
mould" line can be seem in some of the moulded heads (app.
2: nos. 19, 26, 210, 245, 246, 263, 308, etc.). It may help to
measure the moulded part exactly and to identify heads from
the same mould-series.
VI.2.4. The Origins of the Moulding Technique
The use of moulds for clay plaque figurines was known from
the late third millennium BC in Mesopotamia and in Syria
(Spycket 1992:36, 54, 233f). Formerly, scholars believed
53
that the technique of moulding heads, while the bodies are
hand-made or wheel-made, arrived to the Levant from the
Aegean world (Albright 1939:120; Kelso and Thorley, TBM
III:138ff; Patai 1967:60). Currently, all the scholars agree
that the origin of this technique is in the Levant, from where
it spread to Cyprus, the Aegean world, and thence to Italy
and the western Mediterranean. Some scholars date the
spread of this technique to Cyprus to the 8th century BC,
and as for plaque figurines, even to the 9th century BC
(Caubet 1991:136; Vandenabeele 1986:352f, 355;
1989:266). Other scholars lower this date to the seventh
century BC, especially for the appearance of this technique
in Greece (the "Daedalic" style, Higgins 1969:10, 14f;
Morris 1992; Schwartz 1989; Vafoloulou-Richardson
1981:3f, fig. 192; Reyes 1994:35). It is common to think
that other "oriental" motifs appeared in the west together
with this moulding technique, e.g., the motif of the naked
woman and the woman playing the drum. Many scholars
explain this as a result of Phoenician inter-mediation
(Ammerman 1991:208f; Bisi 1989:263; Meerschaert 1991:
186; Sorenson 1991:233f; Vandenabeele 1986:351, 359;
Yon and Caubet 1988:29ff, 33).10 On the other hand, it is
also realized that the coroplastic art of Cyprus had contacts
with the Levantine coast, thus ideas and motifs traveled both
ways (Bisi 1989:289; 1991:88. Such an influence is not
apparent in the JPFs).
The information from the Phoenician coast is still very
partial (Brown 1992; Ward 1994). The difficulties of
defining what "Phoenician art" is exactly, as well as its
exact chronology, deny an unequivocal conclusion in regard
to the origin of the technique of moulded heads (for some
discussions on this subject see Beer 1991; Culican 1969;
1975-6:50ff; Ganzmann a.o. 1987:86, 91-94; Gubel 1991;
Pritchard 1988:5-55).
10 The origin of the later double mould technique is also thought to
be in the "Dea Gravida" and other figurines from the Levant
(Caubet 1992:261f; Yon and Caubet 1988:31).

Chapter VII: Damage and Breakage Patterns
"Even so will I break this people and this city,
as ones breaketh a potter's vessel, that cannot be made whole again" (Jeremiah 19:11).
VII. I. Evidence of Burning
Remains of black soot, indicating burning, are found on the
surface of only four JPFs (i.e., only 0.7% of the whole
corpus). These figurines are marked by "+" in field "BU" of
app. 1 (and app. 2: nos. 157, 246, 247, 269). These four
figurines were most probably burnt when their relative sites
and levels were violently destroyed (e.g., no. 269), or in
accidental fires. It does not seem likely that they were burnt
during deliberate cultic, or magic rituals, since their
quantity is so meager.
VII.2. Breakage Patterns
Many Scholars assumed that the JPFs were deliberately . Another clear case of mutilated figurines are the execration
broken or mutilated (TN 1:145; Jerusalem 11:128; Hubner
1989:53; Ashdod II-III:132; Vincent 1907:163; Holland
1975:137; Macalister 1905; Barkay 1990:191; Jeremias
1993:59). Some scholars even connected the broken JPFs
specifically with Biblical "reforms". They believed that the
JPFs represented a foreign, un-Yahwehistic cult, therefore
the Biblical reformers took special pain to mutilate these
figurines (Mazar, E. 1979:152; Nadelman 1989:123; cf.
Dever 1990: 159). All these theories are built on two bases:
one, the fact that the overwhelming majority of the JPFs
were found broken; second, the assumption that such a high
percentage of damage cannot be accidental. In support of
this theory, it was noted that thick body parts were broken as patterns of the JPFs are shown in Fig. 26 (below). The only
well (Barkay 1990:191), or that the peg-less type A heads
were neatly cut across the neck, as if on purpose (TN 1:245). the thick body, between the base and the chest (fig. 26: code
Yet, there is no decisive archaeological evidence for any
deliberate mutilation of the JPFs, nor any Biblical evidence
about mutilation of small clay figurines in ancient Judah and suggest mutilation, compared with necks (code 1), for
Israel. I
The damage patterns of the JPFs were never closely studied.
I have concentrated on breakage which is easier to see, but
in the future other damage patterns should be studied (small
"chipping", scratches, rubbed surfaces, etc.). Broken parts
were registered in codes, in field "Break" of app. 1. The
codes refer to main breaking points (see Fig. 25 below). The
problem is that almost any point in the JPFs is a weak point,
thus it is extremely hard to decide if any part was broken
accidentally or on purpose. I have checked personally some
120 figurines, but nowhere was there a clear sign for
deliberate mutilation (with the addenda to app. 2, I have
checked ca. 300 figurines, but the results are the same). The
problem is also to define what we are looking for. If one
searches for marks of cutting by knives, for example, there
are none. But if the mutilation was done by smashing the
I There is evidence for metaphorical breakage of pottery vessels,
though (Jeremiah 19:1,11).
figurines against a wall, or on a floor, what evidence should
we look for?
Some of the JPFs' fragments suffered badly, at more than
one point. Still, even this is not certain proof of deliberate
mutilation. It may have been the result of successive,
accidental damages. Many JPFs' fragments are so badly
worn, that their surfaces are obscure and cannot reflect the
causes of damage.
There is evidence about mutilation of figurines from the
ancient Near East. One clear case is a figurine from
Kisonerga in Cyprus, dating to the fourth millennium BC
(peltenburg 1988:292; Ioannides 1992: esp. 39, nn. 7-8).
The clarity in this case is achieved because it is a stone
figurine, and the marks of mutilation are easy to identify.
figurines from Egypt (Ritner 1993:148ff; in the Aegean
world cf. Talalay 1987). I will mention them again in
chapter IX, but even in this case, the written inscriptions on
the figurines show that they were mutilated, and not any
particular form of the broken figurine fragments. 2
One possible way to know if figurines were deliberately
mutilated is by finding indicative breakage patterns. That is,
evidence for a high percentage of broken points, which are
not natural weak points. It must be high enough to be
considered unlikely for accidental breakage, and it must be
evidenced in a large number of figurines. The breakage
point which can be considered an "unnatural" weak point is
5; even this is not beyond doubt). There is no evidence that
this part was broken in a significantly higher rate that would
example.
Although the evidence gathered is very preliminary, a few
observations can be made. Necks were not broken at a
specific point, but at any point along their entire length. Of
course, hand-made heads (type A) have no pegs (and no
breakage along the pegs, fig. 26: code "lp"). There are few
attested broken noses and bases in fig. 26, but this reflects
only the limited registration and not real breakage patterns.
Composite fractions are important, but their registration is
even more preliminary. Many of these registered composite
fractions are minor, e.g., combinations of necks and noses
(codes 1+7), or necks and other facial damages (codes 1+8).
Thus, they do not prove the assumption of deliberate
mutilation. The impression is that the arms are the most
vulnerable part of the body, but one should combine at least
2 Kerestz (1976) suggested that artifacts were broken in the cult of
Hathor, but cf. the study of Pinch (1993:214, 341). Mutilation of
"magical" figurines is discussed in chap. IX (below).
54
some of the broken points 2+3 (fig. 26), which may relate to
the same arm.
There are many other limitations, e.g., do we have enough
figurines to make this statistic reliable? We also do not have
the original figurines (except the few whole ones), only
different fragments, thus the registration of broken parts is
very partial.
VII.3. Experimental Research of
Breakage
There are many possible ways of deliberately breaking a clay
figurine: throwing it with force towards a wall or on a floor,
cutting it with sharp tools, smashing it with a hammer, etc.
On the other hand, only one form is possible for accidental
breakage - an accidental fall of the figurines. Possibly,
figurines can suffer also from violent destruction of sites,
and from secondary damages occurring later, e.g., when
dumped with other debris or during later building activities.
However, if the JPFs were broken accidentally, then most of
them would have been broken by accidentally falling. This
would have occurred from heights of 1.5 m or so at the most
(ancient four-room houses were not much higher).3
Furthermore, the figurines would fallon hard earth floors
(the usual Iron Age floors, unless it happened in the cobbled
courtyards).
By using modem made figurines of roughly the same shape
and size, results of such accidental falls can be studied.
Some 40 figurines were manufactured from terra rosa clay,
selected in the vicinity of northern Jerusalem (fig. 28-29
below). The figurines were hand-made and fired in low
temperatures, ca. 600-700 degrees Celsius.f I hasten to
point out that these modem figurines do not necessarily
resemble the ancient ones in strength or elasticity. Exact
imitation of this sort is hardly possible. On the other hand, it
seemed a bit unlikely that archaeological institutes and
museums would lend me ancient figurines for use in
breaking tests.
The modem figurines were dropped from heights of 1.5-2 m
onto a hard earth surface. One group was dropped from a
height of 3 m onto a cement floor, in order to neutralize the
factors of strength and height, checking only the breaking
point after severe damage. Different initial positions were
tested. Then, the fragments were collected and significant
breaking points registered. The results are listed in Fig. 27
(below).
It appears that the position at the beginning of the fall (or
rather, at its end) has great effects on the results. Figurines
that hit the base or the head were less damaged (fig. 27: nos.
3 Possibly, a figurine could fall from a second floor, but it would
be hard to calculate exactly the resulting effects.
4 The clay was selected with the help of Y. Goren. The figurines
were manufactured by E. Kamayski.
55
21-38). The modem figurines are probably stronger than the
ancient ones, being fired in a modem kiln with temperature
control (and having good, homogeneous clay). Almost a half
remained whole (fig. 27: nos. 1-38).5 The comparison
group (fig. 27: nos. 40-49) shows that the weakest points are
first the arms, then the neck, and then the body and the
nose. This more or less applies to the early trials (nos. 1-38).
The arms are very vulnerable since they are thin and
protruding from the body (also, each figurine has two
arms). The breasts of the modem figurines were damaged
very little, but I suspect that is because they were much too
small and hardly protruding from the body (in comparison
with the ancient JPFs).
The modem figurines sustained less neck fractions, but all
of them have hand-made heads, made as a direct
continuation of the body. They are probably stronger than
the ancient moulded (B) necks (because of the peg).
Furthermore, the modem figurines have very solid and thick
bodies, probably exaggerated in comparison with the JPFs
(Figs. 28-29). All the breaks in the modem figurines appear
"new" and are sharp. The JPFs are perhaps worn out, maybe
because of gradual wear through the years, or due to
differences in material and firing.
All the above may be correct for the modem figurines, but
we cannot be certain that it applies to the ancient ones. The
quantity of the experiments is really too small, enough only
to raise some questions. I believe, though, that the
experiment had everlasting impact upon some of my
neighbours, as it was conducted in an open-air laboratory
(or, more exactly, a backyard between some lame shrubs and
laundry wires).
VI.4. Percentage of Broken Figurines
and Summary
The assumption about deliberate mutilation was made not
only in regard to the JPFs, but to other types of ancient
figurines. For example, for figurines of different periods
from Susa (Spycket 1992:235). Spycket did not explain how
this assumption fits with the evidence that some figurines
were mended by bitumen (ibid: 235, cf. Ucko 1968:419).
Among the JPFs, about 5% remained whole (chap. 11.4
above; there, the number includes "nearly whole" figurines,
even if all the lower body is missing. Here, I am speaking
really about whole figurines). Most of the whole JPFs were
found in tombs, where they were not deliberately mutilated
(see chap. VIII below). The reasons why very few whole
JPFs were left in other contexts can be varied, and they
cannot prove an assumption of deliberate mutilation (nor, of
course, refute it for the JPFs in general).
The question is whether a rate of 5% of whole figurines in
an assemblage is unusual, and thus indicates deliberate
mutilation. An answer is suggested in fig. 30 (below).
5 Cracks were not counted, but in some cases they were very close
to full ruptures.
Though the number of cases is not great, it is enough. The
data clearly shows that a low percentage of whole figurines
is the usual pattern. It is not an exception, but a norm for
small clay figurines, regardless of the period or the type. I do
not mean that the form is not important - probably the fact
that a larger percentage of plaque figurines survived whole
relates to their shape, a compacted, "lump" like form which
is less vulnerable.f Apart from form, what really counts is
the context. In burials, there is a higher percentage of whole
figurines of any kind - since the figurines were put there
cautiouslyand not disturbed after the burials went out of use
(unless they were robed). Grave goods were damaged when
new burials were added, but probably it was not violent,
deliberate damage - just a pushing of the older burials out of
the way. On the other hand, whole figurines are very rare in
fills and refuse debris. Following this conclusion, it is very
unlikely that the JPFs were deliberately mutilated during a
Biblical (religious) reform. Similar breaking patterns appear
elsewhere, in assemblages that were surely not subjected to
the rage of "Biblical reformers".
There are a few more points to be made. The JPFs appear as
good figures (the smile, the full face, the breasts which may
be portrayed as being offered). If they also functioned as
good figures, it is hard to see why they should be mutilated
in ritual acts. Mutilation of "magical" figurines is likely to
occur in "black magic", where the figurines represent
enemies or bad spirits. It is also possible in burial contexts,
where good figures may be broken as signs of grief. But
surely this cannot fit the JPFs, which are mainly found in
domestic contexts (chap. VIII below). Of course, one must
be aware of identifying too simply the outer form and its
appeal to our eyes, with the function and meaning in ancient
times. I am only pointing out that the rope cannot be pulled
from both sides. If one claims that the JPFs represented
Asherah, which was certainly a "good" entity, then it is
impossible to suggest that the figurines were mutilated in
"magical" rites (and as for "Biblical reforms", see above).
6 180 whole plaque figurines are mentioned in fig. 3 (andchap. ill)
This must not be confused; many "nearly whole" figurines are
included in fig. 3 (including evenupper halves of figurines, as long
as the position of the arms and the head survived). Note that most
of the whole figurines are plaque figurines. Furthermore, the
tendency was to publish every whole figurine, while small
fragments were often neglected or discarded. This causes a certain
biasin ourdatabase in favour of the whole figurines.
56
Another argument against the assumption that the JPFs were
mutilated is the lack of deliberate mutilation of the face. The
faces of many JPFs are well preserved and intact. We know
that it was customary to mutilate faces of anthropomorphic
figures in many periods and cultures. Anthropomorphic
representations were feared (as, indeed, other
representations), since people believed that they owned the
powers of those represented. Mutilation of these figures
symbolized their "killing"; it denied them the ability to act
in the real world. Within this context, the head is especially
important, as it enables. a person to see, talk, smell, and
hear. This is the reason for mutilation of statues, paintings,
etc. in Mesopotamia (Brandes 1980; Nylander 1980), Egypt
(Ritner 1993: nn. 671-675) and elsewhere (e.g., mutilation
of eyes in the Dura synagogue, Kelley 1994). This
conception of mutilation does not imply that the mutilated
figures were negative, or "bad": in many cases the mutilators
do not understand or do not care about it too much. There is
no sign of systematic, deliberate mutilation of the faces of
the JPFs (except broken noses and other damages, which
seem accidental). Again, one can argue that the analogy to
large statues and art scenes is misleading, and that perhaps
small clay figurines escaped face-mutilation because it was
considered enough just to break them (but cf. evidence about
small figurines from Egypt, Ritner 1993: nn. 671-675). It is
possible, but one would rather expect to find at least some
mutilated faces if the JPFs were really mutilated in the
course of "zealous Biblical reforms".
To sum up, the study of breakage pattern is complex, and
does not lead to unequivocal answers in regard to the
symbolismand function of the JPFs. It does indicate that the
JPFs are not fundamentally different from any other
assemblage of clay figurines in regard to damage patterns,
and there is no real evidence for their deliberate mutilation.
On the contrary, it seems that accidental breakage is a better
explanation.
Chapter VIII: The Archaeological Context
''Does the Eagle know what is in the pit?
Or will thou go ask the Mole?"
(W. Blake. The Book of Thell. Viking. [1955]: 279)
The only former study of the context of the JPFs, which is
worthy of mentioning, was made by Holladay (1987). Even
this study encompassed only four sites, and the JPFs were
examined as a very secondary component in the discussion.
When dealing with the contexts, the quantity and the
reliability of our data are especially important. The data is
incomplete, and the questions which arise are very
complicated. Who where the owners of the figurines? How
can one determine who used the loci where figurines have
been found? Was the owner of the place necessarily that of
the figurine? Does the context indicate the meaning of a
figurine? Sometimes, scholars tried to pull the rope from
both sides simultaneously (cf. the criticism of Fowler, chap.
11.4.5 above). Can the same type of figurine serve for varied
functions, depending on the contexts (e.g., in a temple it
would have been a cultic figurine, in a tomb it would have
been a tomb gift and in a children's burial- a toy)?
Only 255 JPFs have any contextual data and in many cases
this data is partial or obscure. I will start with the whole
figurines.
VIII.t. The Context of the Whole
Figurines
It is important to separate the whole figurines from the
fragments. One can assume that the context is related to use-
patterns only for whole figurines, and even then this must be
checked for each individual case. The situation is different
with fragments. First, there is a higher danger of mistakes
in stratigraphy, and small fragments might "migrate"
between loci and levels, and be found out of context.
Second, it is unreasonable that the heads, or the bodies,
where used as separate parts. Heads may indeed represent a
whole figure, and are often used for that purpose (e.g., heads
of rulers on coins). This is not valid for the JPFs: their heads
could not be used independently, as they cannot stand
without the body. The moulded heads cannot stand, because
of the peg; the hand-made heads cannot stand, because they
were made as one piece with the body. This negates the
suggestion of Keel and Uehlinger (1992:374), that heads
were used independently.1 It follows that the fragments
indicate disposal patterns after use, rather than actual use-
patterns. The places where we find the fragments are more
likely to be secondary places of disposal. Still, even disposal
patterns may be fruitful for the understanding of the JPFs.
I Keel and Uehlinger had only one perforated head in favour of
their suggestion, but it was found at Megiddo and is not a JPF
head. There is noteven one JPF headwhich is perforated.
57
The data regarding contexts is presented in fig. 31 (below).
I have separated the whole figurines (types Ac, Be) from the
"nearly whole" ones (types A+, B+), which for the study of
contexts must be treated with the other fragments. The
context is registered in two fields of app. 1. Field "context. 1"
includes a short verbal definition of the context, while field
"context.2" is used for a general definition, discussed further
below. In all, 71 different entries (or definitions of contexts)
are registered in field "context.1". These definitions are
sorted into a more workable form as 19 categories (fig. 31:
left column; cf. the discussion below). As mentioned
earlier, all this pertains only to the 255 JPFs which have at
least some information about context.
There are 27 whole JPFs, of which the context of 20 is
known (i.e., 74% of the whole figurines). This is a high rate,
compared with the fragments, amongst which only ca. 40%
have known contexts. Of course, the few whole figurines
were always better published and described. The whole JPFs
are divided almost equally between the hand-made type (A)
and the moulded type (B).
Graves 12 of the 20 whole JPFs were found in graves
(including app. 2: no. 7). This high percentage is expected,
because whole artifacts were usually put cautiously inside
graves. Even if later thrown into a repository to m.ake room
for later interment, it was done from low heights and
without much violence. Once a grave ceases to function
and is sealed, the finds remain in peace (unless disturbed by
robbers or by natural causes). Unfortunately, the exact
locations of the whole JPFs within the graves are rarely
known. We know the specific room inside a grave in
Lachish, but not the exact location in that room (app. 2: nos.
75,80,82). We know that one figurine was found at the left
back side of a room in a grave at Beth Shemesh (app. 2:8),
but this is all.
All the graves are common Judean Iron Age family graves
(cf. Barkay 1994). To the best of my knowledge, there is not
even one whole JPF, that can be safely related to a specific
skeleton. Thus, we do not know if the JPFs belonged to
females, males or both sexes. At Lachish, tomb 106 had at
least 25 skulls, but these could not be preserved. Tomb 120
held remains of ca. 1500 persons. The bone finds from tomb
102 were not published (Lachish III:179, 193, 229). There
are no osteological reports from the earlier excavations at
Beth Shemesh (Mackenzie 1912). The burials of Mamila
(Jerusalem) are still being studied.e All of these are family
burials, or mass-graves. The finding of one or two JPFs in a
grave indicates that it was not put customarily with each
2 Stromberg (1993) studied Greek burial[rods as indicators of the
sex of the buried. TheJudean mass-graves do not enable a similar
study.
burial, but only rarely (cf. Wenning 1991:89). Nor was a
figurine put in each grave; there are hundreds of Iron Age II
graves from Judah (Barkay 1994), but only 28 JPFs were
found in these graves (including the figurine fragments).
It is probable that the JPFs were not intended to be used in
graves, as specific grave goods. They could be occasionally
(and quite rarely) put in a grave as objects which belonged
to the deceased before hislher death and were to
"accompany" him/her afterwards. This is like many other
daily artifacts found in burials. The fact that a figurine was
placed in a grave does not associate it with any cultic or
magic meanings, as is true for any other daily artifacts in the
grave. Lately, there have been many discussions about the
cult of the dead in Ugarit and Israel (Loretz 1992; 1994;
Dietrich and Loretz 1992:39-76; Smith 1994:214-223;
Bloch-Smith 1992). Even if the Judean burials were
accompanied by religious or "magic" rituals, and even if
these burials expressed certain beliefs in after-life, we have
no reason to connect these beliefs and rituals specifically
with the JPFs (versus Engle [1979:29-31] and other
scholars, but cf. Ucko 1968:419).3
The fact that whole JPFs were found in graves contradicts
the theory that all the JPFs were deliberately mutilated. JPFs
were carefully put in graves, obviously in order to function
as whole objects, and certainly not to be broken in a ritual. 4
Other Contexts The remaining 8 whole JPFs have been
found in varied contexts. Two whole JPFs were found in
water cisterns, at Tel en-Nasbeh and Tel Beit-Mirsim (app.
2: 125, 232). It seems that these cisterns were part of the
domestic quarters, but there is no evidence that connects
them with a specific house. Two whole JPFs were found in
a pit at Tel Beit Mirsim, either a silo or a waste pit (app.
2:197-198). The pit is located in a domestic area, but its
exact position is not clear. Garbage was usually thrown
outside the houses, in the streets or outside the city walls,
thus it is more likely that this pit was a silo or some other
installation. Only two whole JPFs were found in domestic
rooms: one on a floor which does not have a clear function
(app. 2: 11 from Beth Shemesh); the other in room 369 of a
four-roomed house (app. 2: 126 from Tel en-Nasbeh). This
house is situated near the big city gate, and its owner
possibly belonged to the higher classes of society. Only one
figurine was found in a casemate room, on the floor (app.
2:252 from Tel Beer Sheba, see further below). The last of
the whole figurines was found in a storehouse (app. 2:253
from Tel Beer Sheba), and is the only whole JPF from an
unequivocal public context.
3 One can quote Barkay (1994:153) in relation to graves from
Judah: "fmds from graves should not be explained as special fmds,
destinedto serve as burial gifts, or as objects of magical meaning;
but as part of an assemblage of artifacts, which surrounded the
peopleand were used by them during their lives" (free translation
from the Hebrew).
4Thus, these are not objects whose main function is to be
mutilatedin "magical" rituals.
58
Most of the whole JPFs (other than in tombs) are related to
domestic contexts, except the one from the public storehouse
(above).. Unfortunately, we do not have exact details of the
nature of these contexts. At least in some cases, like at Tel
Beer Sheba, the whole figurines survived by chance, when
the level was violently destroyed. There is no clear evidence
for cultic contexts of the figurines (whether religious or
magic). The figurines are found in regular domestic
assemblages, without obvious cultic vessels in the vicinity
(for example, stone altars, fenestrated cult stands, and
exceptional luxury artifacts).
Figurine no. 252 from Tel Beer Sheba represents the only
case of a whole JPF from a domestic context whose details
are more or less clear. It was found together with daily
pottery vessels and two miniature clay models, one a lamp
and one a stool or a bed (BS 1:36). Does this constitute
proof for a cultic assemblage, as suggested by the excavators
(or, to use a term more common now, a "house cult", for
which see chap. X.7.1 below)? Regarding the architectural
form, the room is part of a regular house, without any
special attributes to suggest religious or "magic" functions.
It seems that the cultic explanation was again based on the
pre-conception, that the JPFs have cultic meaning, or that
they represented a goddess (called 'Astarte' by the
excavators). I do not claim that this explanation is
impossible, but only that it was not proven in regard to the
figurine from Tel Beer Sheba, nor indeed any of the JPFs.
To sum up, there are very few whole JPFs, hardly enough to
present a general picture of the use of the JPFs. The JPFs
from burials negate the assumption of deliberate mutilation,
and there is no clear evidence that suggests religious
contexts for any of the figurines.
VIII.2. The Context of the
Fragments
I will follow the order of fig. 31 (left column), explaining
the various categories of context when necessary. The
location of JPFs and other figurines from selected sites is
mapped out in figs. 34-40 (below).
Cisterns (14 fragments). Usually, the cisterns concerned
are small and related to domestic buildings. Some of these
cisterns open into rooms or courtyards of houses. Other
cisterns are situated in open areas, or in areas poor in
building remains within the settlements {app. 2: 133, 139,
153,232). Two figurines were found in cistern 25 at Beth
Shemesh (nos. 10, 29). This cistern is situated near a
junction of two streets, and could have been a public cistern
- though probably used by everyone (i.e., by 'private'
persons). Regarding typology, there is no obvious
connection between the cisterns and any specific sub-type of
JPF(all the major sub-types were found in cisterns).
Water Pools (27 Fragments). One figurine from Lachish
was perhaps related to the "large pit" (app. 2:60), but all the
other fragments in this category were found in the large pool
of Gibeon. This 'public' pool obviously served the needs of
the whole population of Gibeon for a considerable period of
time within the Iron Age II. Not even one whole JPF was
found there, only fragments that could not be mended
(Gibeon WS:22f). If is thus likely that the JPFs' fragments
reached the pool at different times, and not as one
homogeneous group. The distribution of the fragments in
different depths of the pool can strengthen this conclusion.
But how did the fragments get into the pool?
If the JPFs were thrown whole into the pool, we would have
expected some to survive whole; the water would have
absorbed the shock of the fall. Therefore, it seems that the
JPFs were thrown after breakage, as fragments. This does
not reveal, whether they were deliberately broken in a ritual
and then thrown (thus the excavators, also Hubner 1989:53),
or only broken accidentally and thrown as waste. In favour
of the last assumption, one can compare the many other
broken pottery vessels from the same pool. 5 Furthermore,
the pool itself served daily needs and does not prove there is
any religious or "magic" function of the JPFs - just as the
JPFs do not prove (currently) a religious or "magic" role for
the pool itself. 6
Silos and Other Pits (14 fragments, almost all of sub-
types B and C). Apart from the fragments, few whole
figurines were also found in silos and pits, which seem to
belong to domestic dwellings." It is important to know if
JPFs were found in waste pits, for this may prove that they
had no special sacred status during disposal. Unfortunately,
. there is no clear evidence for this. The exact function of
many pits is unknown. It seems that most of the pits
concerned have been used as silos, or as other domestic
installations. This is likely for pits inside houses, since
refuse was usually thrown out of the houses.
Caves (16 fragments). Four of these fragments were
found near the entrance to Jerusalem cave 1, and could have
been connected with activities outside the cave. Two
fragments were found in caves, of which the nature is not
clear (app. 2:472 from Maresha and app. 2:41 from a cistern
or burial in Gezer). All the rest of the fragments are related
to Jerusalem cave I (except one fragment in doubt, app.
2:430). This brings us to the complex question of the nature
of this cave.
Some 1300 artifacts were found in cave I, including animal
figurines, miniature models of furniture and quantities of
daily pottery - vessels (Holland 1975:328; 1977:136). The
cave was probably used in the 8th century BC (Jerusalem
5 Large quantities of broken pottery were found in the pool, but
only two whole jars (Gibeon WS:16). Some of the figurine-
fragments could have been part of debris fill, dumped or washed
into the pool.
6 For clarification, one has only to compare with a really cultic
, pool, the Mayan cenota in Chichen Itza. The differences are clear,
and show that it is the JPFs themselves that, when assumed to be
cultic, lead to the cultic explanationof the Gibeonpool.
7 I have excludesfragment no. 456, found in the secondary context
of a Hellenistic pit.
I 59
II:49f). Kenyon defined the cave as the favissa of a nearby
temple, but evidence for the existence of such a temple was
never found. Currently, the cave is explained as a center for
house cult, or domestic cult, i.e., related to "magic",
"popular religion" or "unofficial cult" (e.g., Holladay 1987;
Dever 1990:159; Jerusalem 11:49, 125; Franken 1995; cf.
also Bourke 1992. I have reviewed all these opinions in
chap. II above). Kenyon and Holland thought that the
finding of broken JPFs beside whole pottery vessels
indicated that the first were deliberately mutilated (Holland
1975:330,337; but cf. chap. VII above). On this basis, some
scholars even related cave I with Biblical reforms, especially
that of Josiah (chap. III; e.g., Dever 1990: 159f; Barkay
1990:191; cf. Nadelman 1989:123). This is all too far
fetched: figurines are much more vulnerable than daily
pottery vessels (cf. chapter VII above). If the JPFs were
broken in the cave during rituals, why were only fragments
found there, without even one case of two figurine fragments
that could be mended together?
Again, my impression is that the JPFs themselves are the
main reason for the cultic label attached to Jerusalem cave I.
This clearly forms a circular argument: once the figurines
are removed, what archaeological evidence is there of a
cultic function for cave I, whether Yahwehistic, unofficial or
"popular"? Only three or four artifacts, out of some 1300
found in this cave, can be termed cultic: one broken cult
stand (Holland 1977: fig. 9:23; Jerusalem 11:44, C270); two
small stone altars and one pottery model, perhaps of a
temple (Holland 1977: fig. 9:20-22). Perhaps cave I was
used for usual, domestic activities, just like the domestic
function of the nearby rooms. I will conclude with this
remark, and return to discuss cave I later (chapter VIllA. 1
below).
Tombs (8 fragments, in addition to 12 whole figurines
discussed above). The only information in regard to the
context of two fragments from Tel Beer Sheba and Jericho is
found in the cards of the Rockefeller Museum and Romema
(app. 2: nos. 73, 481). As far as I know, graves were not
excavated by Aharoni at Tel Beer Sheba, so there is
probably a mistake in the card or in my own registration (for
app.2:481). Three other fragments include one from Beth
Shemesh tomb I (app. 2: 15); one from the left bench of Beth
Shemesh tomb 5 (app. 2:9); one from Lachish tomb 120
(app. 2:79) and three from Mamila, Jerusalem (app. 2:467-
469). Two body fragments were found in the repository
inside tomb 5 at Mamila (app. 2:467-468). Were they put
there after deliberate breakage (as a sign of mourning,
perhaps)? It is possible, but they could also be remains of
whole figurines that were damaged or lost after the
interment for one reason or another.
Rooms in Houses (49 fragments, in addition to two whole
figurines, discussed further below). This is by far the largest
group among the JPFs' fragments. Part of this group could
have been broken during emergency times (e.g., a violent
destruction of a level), and therefore left broken in the
houses. This cannot apply to all the group (not all the levels
were violently destroyed, and there is no case were
fragments from the same locus could be mended together).
Thus, it seems that part of this group, if not most of it,
indicates disposal patterns after use. If true, then the
fragments were not considered holy or sacred when
discarded, at least not to the extent that one would bury
them in specialfavissae (like broken cult statues). Most of
the houses are three- or four- roomed houses (the exact
architectural plan is not relevant). Some of the figurines
were used perhaps in upper stores, and fell down when the
houses were ruined. Thus, their place of discovery will not
always indicate the place of use. Generally, there is not
enough information in order to indicate the exact function of
each room. Very rarely do the rooms belong to a later
period, and it is obvious that the fragments had nothing to
do with them (app. 2:240, perhaps also nos. 295-297).8
Some of the buildings are bigger or different in plan from
regular domestic houses, and perhaps these were public
buildings (app. 2:118, 276, 262).
Two whole figurines (app. 2:11, 216) were found in what
look like regular domestic buildings. They prove that the
JPFs were indeed used in such buildings, as does the large
amount of fragments. The fragments originated in whole
figurines, and it is likely that the last were used in the
houses. After being broken, the fragments were dumped
nearby; some thrown outside houses (below), some left
inside. Other figurines were broken when sites suffered
conquest and destruction (for the question of deliberate
mutilation see chap. VII above).
Courts (10 fragments). This group of fragments was
found in open courts, and not in rooms. Almost all of them
are from domestic buildings (except app. 2:205). Whole
JPFs were not found in courts, perhaps because the last were
used for cooking and other household industries, while the
JPFs functioned in relation to the roofed living / storage
areas. After the figurines broke, the fragments were thrown
and a few ended up in the courts (or in the streets, see
below). This is only a likely scenario, since the quantity of
fragments from courts is small. We need much more
information in order to attain clear answers.
Other Domestic Contexts (19 fragments). A few domestic
categoriesin fig. 31 (left column) are grouped together here.
Two fragments came from houses that are probably
domestic, but further information about the exact place in
the houses where they were found is lacking. Other
fragments were found in doubtful contexts that could not be
better specified: "room or court" (app. 2:144, 149, 455);
"room or alley" (app. 2:17, 35, 131,447); "room?" (app.
2:20, 26, 100, 166, 228, 272, 454) and "house?" (app. 2:69,
477). It is likely that most of these cases concern regular,
domesticloci.
Gates Only two fragments can be numbered in this
category (app. 2:165, 224). Another fragment (app. 2:96)
was found in proximity to a gate, but on the surface (it is
included in the category of surface finds, mentioned below).
8 These are cases of mixed stratigraphy from early excavations.
Generally, I asswned that the stratigraphy of the excavators is
valid, unless there is evidence to the contrary.
60
Of course, the whole population passed through the gates,
thus this "public" location teaches us nothing about the
owner of the fragments in question.
Storehouse (7 fragments). Four fragments, as well as one
whole figurine (chap. VIII.1 above) were found in the public
storehouses at Tel Beer-Sheba and Beth-Shemesh (the so
called "tripartite buildings"). In both these sites, the
buildings clearly functioned as storehouses and not as
stables. The fragments were found both in the storage areas
and in the central passages. Two other fragments were
found in a public storehouse (but not tripartite) at Tel Ira,
close to the gate. All these buildings were not related to cult.
The figurines could have been part of the "furniture" of the
buildings, or personal belongings of the staff that worked
there. It is also possible (though much less likely) that they
belonged to 'private' people who came to deliver / accept
goods. If the fragments indicate only disposal patterns, then
they were dumped, without any special holiness, in the
storehouses. Another possibility is that they were broken
when sites were destroyed by violence, and the other parts
were not found in the excavations (this is less likely,
especially in the case of Beth Shemesh, where there is no
clear evidence of a violent destruction in the 8th century
BC).
Streets and Alleys (8 fragments). The streets are simply
the wider thoroughfares between quarters, or along the inner
side of the city walls (fig. 33). The alleys are narrow
passages, usually between domestic buildings. The
fragments from streets and alleys are important for
understanding the disposal patterns. It seems that the
fragments were thrown into the streets and alleys after the
figurines were broken. It is hardly possible to imagine whole
figurines thrown into the streets, and none were found there
(neither were fragments that could be mended). There is no
element of holiness or sacredness here, but rather what
happened is the dumping of domestic waste after it went out
of use. Refuse of bones, broken pottery, ashes, etc. is
commonlyfound in street fills of the Iron Age II (e.g., Hazor
area B and the new northern cut in Beth-Shemesh). The
origin of the fragments is not certain. Probably, most were
thrown from domestic buildings, but few perhaps from
public buildings (e.g., app. 2:273 from Tel Beer Sheba,
found near the public storehouses). Fragments can also be
carried away, e.g., inside sewage trenches of the jnain
streets. In any case, the disposal of JPFs' fragments in streets
and alleys casts doubts on the assumption that the JPFs
represented a venerated, high goddess (cf. Voigt 1983,
chapter II.4.5 above). On the other haad, we must not
forget that objects lose a great deal of value (both economic
and symbolic) after they are broken, thus a direct equation of
disposal patterns and use patterns is dangerous.
Open Areas (9 fragments). These fragments were found
in open areas inside sites, but usually the nature of the area
is not clear. In one case, it seems that it is an area of a gate
and public buildings (app. 2:136). In most of the other cases,
the areas are situated close to domestic quarters.
Outside Settlements (12 fragments). At least 3 JPFs
fragments were found in the glacis outside the city walls.
They were probably thrown outside the walls, or transferred
inside fills that were used to repair the fortifications (app.
2:246, 248, 449). Fragments could have related also with
extra- mural quarters of domestic buildings, such as those
found at Tel en-Nasbeh, Lachish area 500 (and the western
slope of the fortress of Arad?). Other fragments were
perhaps related to caves (app. 2:167, 143). One fragment
was found near a cemetery, but perhaps it was thrown above
the city wall and rolled down the slope (app. 2:24). The
fragments from area 500 at Lachish, mentioned above, could
also belong to nearby cemeteries (app. 2:83, 84, 90, 93, 95).
Fills, Surface Finds, Debris and Miscellaneous (37
fragments). 11 fragments were found in fills of later periods
from Kenyon's excavations in Jerusalem, i.e., in secondary
contexts. 8 fragments were found in debris of an unclear
nature. 10 fragments were surface finds, but sometimes the
general nature of the area was known from the excavations.
The last 8 fragments were found in various contexts: one
above bedrock (probably from a domestic assemblage, app.
2:462), one from the surface of a public building which may
belong to a late period (the so called "tower" at Tel en-
Nasbeh, app. 2:171), one from the "western tower" of Tel
Beit Mirsim (app. 2:225), one from a secondary context of a
Hellenistic foundation trench (app. 2:444), two from debris
at Tel en-Nasbeh (app. 2:145, 154) and the last two from
unclear contexts (app. 2:2, 448).
VIII.3. A General Analysis of
Contexts
It is not easy to translate the detailed observations about the
contexts of the fragments (above) into clear conclusions.
Definitions like "cistern", "room" or "house" do not indicate
the general nature of such loci. Is it a domestic room, the
room of a temple, or perhaps of a military fortress? Rarely,
the picture is different: we know the general nature of an
area, while the exact locus and stratigraphy of the figurine
are not clear (e.g., a figurine found on the surface of an area
that was used only for domestic buildings). In order to
achieve a wider picture, I have defined a few general
categories of contexts: private, public, sacred and burial
(app. 1: field "context.2"). The difficulties inherent in such
a definition are, of course, formidable. My intention is to use
the simplest definitions, in order to avoid the difficulties and
achievea general picture, though somewhat simplified.
A schematic plan of a Judean city of the Iron Age II is
presented in Fig. 33 (below). It is not an accurate plan of
any specific city, but a more or less representative plan,
expressing features known from many excavated cities in
Judah. The burial assemblages of such cities are usually
well defined: whole cemeteries of rock-hewn tombs, cut in
the slopes of the city itself or in the nearby slopes. Only
rarely do doubts arise about the function of a certain cave,
whether domestic, industrial or burial. The public areas of a
Judean city are also quite well defined, including gates,
61
storehouses (or stables), fortifications (walls, towers), water
systems and large silos. Public building, such as palaces,
are recognized by their special plan, large size, prominent
position and the appearance of luxury objects. There are
doubts in regard to houses which have the usual domestic
plan, but are larger and well-situated: in this case, clear
separation of 'public' from 'private' is impossible. It is
probable that all the public areas mentioned above, except
perhaps palaces and "secret" military institutions, were open
to the general public (i.e., for all or most of the "common"
population). Furthermore, daily domestic vessels can be
used in every public loci.9
Sacred or cultic buildings are little known from Iron Age II
Judah. Excluding for the moment the question of a "house
cult", cult was practiced in temples and "high places", and
very few of these have been found in excavations. As a
matter of fact, from Iron Age II Judah we only have the
temple of Arad (for other doubtful cultic assemblages see
Holladay 1987; for the definition of temples in the ancient
Near East cf. Lundquist 1983; Shiloh 1979; Nakhai 1994).
Of course, sacred structures from Israel and other
neighboring kingdoms do not help here.
It would be safe to say that domestic contexts are by far the
best represented in any excavation. These contexts include
not only houses, but small cisterns, silos and pits as well as
open courts. Furthermore, though casemate rooms were
architecturally part of public city walls, they served for
domestic purposes, as part of four-room houses. Unless
there is evidence to the contrary, the assemblages found in
casemate rooms should be treated as domestic in nature. It
is hard to define the general nature of streets and alleys in
terms of public or private. The. population as a whole used
these streets and alleys, without clear social separations.
Their waste fills can come from any building. Even if the
nature of the adjoining building is known, it can not be
applied, since small fragments can be moved large distances
in the streets (e.g., by sewage trenches).
The general context of 173 JPFs, including a few doubtful
cases, can be determined. The picture is presented in fig. 32
(below). Most of these JPFs are related to domestic (private)
contexts: 70 specimens, plus another 42 doubtful ones.
This is natural, since most of the excavated areas are
domestic, or include daily artifacts. Still, the obvious
conclusion is that the JPFs were not expensive objects, and
that they were used by the population as a whole (or, by the
so called "common" people). 19 JPFs were found in graves.
17 other figurines were found in caves, mostly from
Jerusalem cave 1 but also from caves which could have been
tombs. Only 9 JPFs could be ascribed to public contexts
(with 11 more in doubt). There is hardly any evidence for
JPFs in sacred contexts (5 JPFs at the most, including app.
2: 238, 252, 446, 448). One figurine from Lahav was found
9 Even a palace would use daily pottery vessels, e.g., for the use of
its servants. The opposite is also possible: the use of royal
commodities outside the royal circles, e.g., in times of danger.
Thus, the Imlk jars from Lachish could be used to feed the whole
population during Sennacherib's siege.
together with carved limestone blocks and a fenestrated clay
stand in a domestic context (Jacobs 1992; Borowski 1995;
cf. app. 2:238), which was called a "house shrine". I have
not included the finds from Jerusalem Cave I here, since I
do not define it as a cultic assemblage (see chap. VIII.2,
section "caves" above). The scarcity of JPFs in sacred
assemblage may be due to the scarcity of excavated sacred
buildings, or to the difficulties of defining sacred and cultic
in the archaeological record in general.
I must stress that the categories private, public and sacred,
as detailed above, define the buildings and the physical
places, and not necessarily the finds and the people
concerned. In other words, even if a building can be termed
sacred, it does not imply that each and every artifact found
within it is necessarily sacred.
One clear conclusion that can be drawn is that the JPFs
were found, and probably used, in all types of contexts, or
at all levels of human activity, and especially in the daily,
domestic realm. Another interesting fact is, that female
pillar figurines are missing, or extremely rare, in the few
clear sacred buildings (of "official cult") of the Iron Age II.
In Edom, two clear Iron Age cultic assemblages have been
found so far: Qitmit (Beit Arieh 1995) and En Hazevah
(Cohen and Yisrael 1995). In both assemblages, the cultic
vessels are mainly large pottery stands, and small, hand-
made female figures are applied to these. Only three heads
(among hundreds of vessels and fragments) from Qitmit
belonged to free standing figurines, probably of the pillar
type (Beck 1995). There are none from En Hazevah, as far
as I know. In Judah, the temples were perhaps an-iconic
(Beck, ibid). At Arad only two JPFs' fragments, at the most,
could be related to the temple (app. 2:446, 448). A similar
situation probably existed in the earlier precincts of Tel
Qasileh (Iron Age I, Philistia) and Dan (Iron Age II,
northern Israel). 10 Is this accidental, since the number of
sacred Iron Age II buildings is so small? Or perhaps the
small, clay pillar figurines had no role in sacred public
places? If so, it is a different situation from the Greek
world, where small figurines were dedicated in temples
(Alroth 1989). At present, an unequivocal answer about any
function/s of the JPFs in the public cult is impossible.
VIII.4. Groups of Figurines
So far, I have only discussed the context of single JPFs. It is
time to ask whether there existed groups of JPFs, which
testify to the use of more than one figurine at the same time
and place? The answer is not simple, and I will begin with
data concerning single loci. I will not deal with loci whose
nature is obscure, nor with surface finds, nor with general
areas (such as Lachish loci 500 and 1500), as these cannot
contribute anything to the discussion. 11 Throughout the
10 Quantities of small figurines were found in Jerusalem cave I
and Samaria locus E.207, but the definition of those assemblages
as culticis doubtful (chap. VIII. 1-2above).
11 For example, room 44 from Crowfoot's excavation in Jerusalem
is probably late, and the figurines belonged to an earlierlevel (app.
62
discussion that follows, buildings are designated by one
prominent room number (e.g., Beer Sheba building 32) or a
combination of a few rooms (e.g., Beth Shemesh house 370-
374). Groups of JPFs appear with their catalogue numbers
and "+" signs (e.g., app. 2: 13+15).
vm.4.1. Groups of JPFs from Single Loci
Burials. 2-4 JPFs were found in a few burials, i.e., Beth
Shemesh tombs 1 (app. 2: 13+15), Beth Shemesh tomb 5
(app. 2: 8+9); Lachish tombs 106 (app. 2: 75+80+82)
Lachish tomb 1002 (app. 2: 76+77+78+81) and Mamila
tomb 5 (app. 2: 467+468). I cannot define these JPFs as
groups, since there is no evidence that they are real groups,
in a sense of figurines used together at the same time. They
were found in the same places, but it is much more likely
that these figurines belonged to different persons, and were
put in the grave when those persons died, i.e., at different
times. The JPFs from Mamila were found in the repository
pit of the grave, probably thrown there when new burials
have been added. The figurines were probably personal
property (cf. Pritchard 1943:87), and not a group which
belonged to the whole tomb as such, or even to one of its
rooms. The assumption of personal property fits a head of a
horse figurine from Samaria that carries an inscribed name,
presumably of its owner (Chapter IX.2 below; of course, it is
not a JPF). Since personal ownership can be possible for
religious or "magical" objects, it does not negate the
explanation of the JPFs as such.
Cisterns. A few JPFs were found together in domestic
cisterns at Tel Beit Mirsim (app. 2: 197+198, perhaps also
217+218), Tel el-Ful (app. 2: 193+194), Tel En-Nasbeh
cistern 216 (app. 2: 133+139+153+492+493) and Tel en-
Nasbeh cistern 159 (app. 2: 142+170+179+180). Add
cistern 25 in Beth Shemesh, which could have been a public
cistern (app. 2: 10+29). According to Zorn, a few figurines
were also found in cisterns 176 and 300 at Tel en-Nasbeh
(personal communication). Like the mass graves (above),
the cisterns indicate only disposal patterns, and there is
nothing to prove that the figurines were thrown into them as
real groups, i.e., at the same time. This holds true for the
Gibeon pool as well (cf. chap. VIl.l-2 above).
Domestic Quarters and other Residential Areas.
Unfortunately, only a few domestic loci can be considered
for the present purpose. These arei
1. Beth Shemesh, locus 374 (app. 2: 14+35). The trouble is,
that there are two loci with this number on the map, thus the
fragments were not necessarily found in the same place (Fig.
34 below).
2. Kh. Geresh, locus 19 (body fragments, app. 2: 459-461).
2: 295-296). Street 38-39 at Tel Beer Sheba is very long, therefore
the fragments found there do not make a real group (app. 2: 257,
470).
3. Arad, locus 350 (app. 2: 446+453). The figurines
concerned are a hand-made head and a body fragment, and
they are the only finds from a little room in the temple (fig.
35 below).
4. Tel Beer Sheba, locus 443 (app. 2: 262+268). In this case,
it may be fragments from different rooms of the same
building (fig. 38 below).
5-7. Tel Beit Mirsim, locus SE.13.32 (app. 2: 203+229; cf.
fig. 39), locus NW.32.10 (app. 2: 210+216, two moulded
heads, cf. fig. 40) and locus NW32.12 (app. 2: 220+221, two
body fragments).
8. Ramot, locus 131 (app. 2: 464+309, two body fragments).
Dr. Zorn kindly handed me a list of figurines from Tel en-
Nasbeh, based on the excavators' diaries at Berkeley. A few
more groups should perhaps be added on the basis of this
list, as follows:
9. Room 64, a body fragment (museum no. 311) and a pillar
base (app. 2: 569).
10. Room 438, a head (app. 2: 150), two pillar bases and a
body fragment.
11. Room 513, two pillar bases.
12. Room 616, two heads (app. 2: 496+497; for the room see
Zorn 1993:360).
Possibly, a few more pairs exist in the following rooms: 221
(app. 2:136 and museum no. 906); 366; 372; 393 (app.
2:134 and a body fragment); 398 (app. 2:152 and another
fragment) and 445. I have not seen the other figurines that
are mentioned in the list, and am not certain that they are all
JPFs. In any case, even together with all of these figurines,
the number of JPFs' groups is very small in relation to the
general quantity of JPFs.
Jerusalem Cave 1. With this cave we reach another
challenge. All former scholars did not dispute the cultic
character of this cave, whether defining it as a favissa of a
temple (Kenyon), or as a center for "popular religion",
"magic", or "house cult" (e.g., Jerusalem II; Franken 1995;
Holladay 1987; for discussion of ritual in archaeology cf.
Barrett 1991). It seems that this explanation rests on the
assumption that the JPFs are "magical" or "cultic" figurines
(chap. VIII.2 above). The assemblages of nearby caves II-III
seem to strengthen this conclusion. They are not
fundamentally different from cave I, except for rather minor
differences in the appearance of certain pottery types and
their relative quantities per cave. JPFs were not found in
caves II-III, and I suspect that this is due to an earlier date of
these caves - before the use of the JPFs became common (but
the reason can also be accidental). Not surprisingly, caves
II-III were never defined as cultic (Jerusalem II: 125; the
explanation in relation with "guest houses" is awkward, but
this is beyond the scope of the present work). The reason is
63
very clear: the lack of JPFs. Remove the JPFs from cave I,
and its presumed cultic nature dissolves almost completely.
In view of the conclusion above, what is the evidence of cave
I regarding groups of JPFs? At a first glance, it is tempting
to see the JPFs from the cave as a group. Once this view is
taken (it was taken for granted), it is easy to believe that this
group of figurines formed the focus of religious, or "magic"
rituals inside the cave. This view is tempting altogether
because it is so romantic. At last, there is evidence of Judean
religious (or "magical") beliefs of the Iron Age period, from
Jerusalem itself and from a mysterious place. 12 But is this
view true?
One must ask is it probable that all the 1300 artifacts from
cave I were in use at the same time? Regardless of the cultic
definition of these artifacts, how can this be possible in such
a small cave? A casual look in the plan shows how small it
is (Holland 1977: fig. 6). What free place could the cave
offer for performing any cultic rituals, with all these objects?
It seems to me that there is no escape from the conclusion
that cave I is a storage assemblage. As a matter of fact,
this is not so far from the former explanation of Kenyon -
"favissa" - only she labeled the artifacts as cultic.
If this definition is true, all the artifacts were not used inside
cave I, but deposited (or dumped) there, perhaps during a
prolonged period of time (say, 20-30 years). We do not
know the identity of those who put the finds in the cave, nor
the circumstances involved, neither .the origins of the finds
(nearby buildings? of what sort? disposal of waste?). We
cannot even be sure that all the artifacts originated from the
same place. Cave I, unfortunately, is a secondary context,
and its value for understanding the JPFs is more limited
then previously thought. All the JPFs from the cave are
fragmented, possibly in a disposal context. There is no clear
evidence that these figurine fragments formed one real
group with direct relationships between each member.
Summary. Unfortunately, most of the contexts discussed
above fall into the category of general, mass contexts
(graves, pools, cisterns, pits and caves). As such, they do not
indicate the existence of meaningful, contemporaneous
groups of JPFs at the same locus. Furthermore, most of
these contexts relate to disposal patterns rather than to use
patterns. As for loci from "living" levels, there are only
about a dozen domestic loci in which 2-4 JPFs' fragments
have been found together. So far, no two whole JPFs were
found together in one "living" loci (such as rooms, courts,
storehouses and casemate rooms). Certainly, larger groups
never appear in the archaeological record. It is true that the
present data is very partial, and that its nature is mainly
"negative", but the picture seems quite clear - the JPFs were
not used in groups.
12 Caves are mysterious, romantic places. I say this not out of
scorn, but out of deep conviction.
 VDI.4.2. Groups of JPFs in Whole Buildings
(Figs. 34-40)
Since each domestic building served one family, the
question of whether each house had more than one JPF
might be important (for a study of the family in Israel see
Stager 1985, with further references). Did one family use
only one figurine at a time, or a few spread in different
rooms of the house? The study of single loci alone (above)
would not answer such questions. The problem is, that
even if we find a few JPFs' fragments in the same building,
how can we know for sure that they were used at the same
time? If they are only fragments of figurines, perhaps these
were imbedded in floors and fills after being broken. The
data is very preliminary and the search is time consuming. I
have concentrated on main sites, and used distribution maps
(figs. 34-40 below). I will not discuss here mass loci such as
graves, cisterns and caves, because these will be useless for
our purposes. The following is a list of JPFs found in the
same buildings. It is surely a very incomplete list.
1. Beth Shemesh, house 370-374 (app. 2: 14+17+35). Only
the area of season 1933 was published adequately, but the
plan of house 370-374 is incomplete (fig. 34 below).
2. Arad, locus 350 (app. 2: 446+453, already discussed
above; cf. fig. 35 below).
3. Arad. A house in the south of the fort, formed if the
casemate wall is removed (app. 2:57+451, perhaps also 477;
cr.fig. 35 below). The casemate wall is probably later (for
the debate about it see Herzog 1984; Mazar and Netzer
1986; Ussishkin 1988).
4. Tel Beer Sheba, house 443 (app. 2: 262+268, already
discussed in chap. VIII.4. 1 above). Fig. 38 (below).
5. Tel Beer Sheba, the eastern storehouse (app. 2:
251+254+266).
6. Tel Beer Sheba, a room (?) east of the "cellars house 32"
(app. 2: 259+269). If this room was part of the cellars house,
add app. 2:276. Fig. 38 (below).
7-9. Tel Beit Mirsim, two groups from single loci, already
reported above (app. 2: 210+216; 220+221). The third group
is from two separate loci in a house (app. 2: 211+231).
10. Tel en-Nasbeh, building 634+639 (app. 2: 177+156).13
11. Tel en-Nasbeh, building 399+670+398 (app. 2: 148+
152).
A few more groups may have existed at Tel en-Nasbeh,
according to the list made by Zorn. These are: house
661+656+655 (app. 2: 87 + pillar base F); house 432+
453+430 (app. 2: 57+60 + base fragment B); and finally
house 370+439 (app. 2: 494+169). The data is incomplete.
13 For JPFs' fragments A-G see app. 2: note after no. 576.
64
The list includes only a short verbal description, and I have
not seen these figurines.lf Furthermore, in many cases it is
impossible to define the houses with certainty (Zorn 1993).
The conclusions are still clear; there is no significant
evidence for the use of groups of JPFs together at the same
time and place. The "groups" found above include mainly
fragments that do not necessarily imply use-patterns. The
quantity of groups is small, as is the number of figurines
within each group. It thus seems that each JPF functioned
separately, and not in "scenes" composed of groups of JPFs
together (for relation to other finds see chap. VIII.5 below).
This conclusion fits the assumption that the figurines were
"private" property. It is also important, since it strengthens
the view that all the JPFs represented the same figure, and
not many independent figures. If all the JPFs symbolized
the same figure, it explains why there was no need to repeat
this figure in the same "scene". This is the most likely
explanation for the lack of contemporaneous groups of JPFs.
VIII.5: The Relation to Other
Artifacts
Holladay (1987:275fi) was the first scholar to discuss the
relation between the JPFs and other finds. His study was
limited to four sites only, and to the level of whole buildings
(rather then loci). This is problematic, since when each loci
is checked, most of the "house groups" dissolve. Houses
cannot form good units of study regarding relations between
the artifacts. Holladay claimed that the JPFs served in
"house shrines", situated in the upper storeys. When the
houses collapsed, the JPFs were dispersed in the ground
floor. This theory is complicated, and surely it cannot apply
to all the JPFs. Holladay (1987:276) believed that all the
figurines (including animal figurines) are religious artifacts
that imply a cult practiced in about half of the houses of Tel
Beit Mirsim. He did not distinguish at all between fragments
in secondary locations and whole figurines in situ, and
ignored the acute problem of whether the place of find
reflects use-patterns, or only disposal patterns.
If data and time were unlimited, we could have looked for
every possible connection between the JPFs and any other
artifact. Some limits are inevitable. I have concentrated on a
few types of artifacts that seemed more promising. For
example, one finds daily pottery vessels almost everywhere.
A registration of all the vessels found beside the JPFs would
be cumbersome and perhaps unrewarding. If one specific
type of vessel is related to the JPFs more than another type,
it will be meaningful but it would be very time consuming to
find that specific type. For the present study I have used two
fields in app. 1. The first field lists relations with other
figurines (field "FGRP"), while the second field lists
relations with other types of artifacts ("LFND"). All the
codes in these fields are given in key 2 (below). I have used
the distribution maps for the main sites (figs. 34-40) and the
data in appendixes 4-5 (below).
14 Of course, this is all my fault and has nothing to do with Dr.
Zorn.
The discussion is very preliminary. I have only checked
singe loci, since the study of whole buildings is less
rewarding but even more time consuming (above).
VDI.5.1. Relation to Other Types of Figurines
Cappo 1: field "FGRP fI
)
A. Female Figurines (other than JPFs)
Outside Judah, female figurines are common (appendixes 4-
5), but these had, of course, no physical contact with the
JPFs. Most of the plaque figurines (app. 4.VIII-4.IX, 5.Y)
are earlier than the JPFs. A few plaque figurines are
contemporaneous, but very rarely found in Judah. Other
than JPFs, there are not many female figurines in Iron Age
II Judah (app. 5, types 5.1.2, 5.1Y.4, 5.IV.5, 5.1.6), even if
we include heads and bodies whose sex in not very clear. IS
I have found no meaningful connections between these other
figurines and the JPFs. As usual, the location and date of
many of these other female figurines is not clear, or
inadequately published. It is a moot point whether these
other, differently rendered types of female figurines
portrayed the same figure as the JPFs, or perhaps different
figures.
B. Male Figurines
The number of male clay figurines from Judah is meager
(app. 5.11.3). A few of these have been found with JPFs but
only in mass contexts. The places are Tel en-Nasbeh ci~tern
216 (app. 5.11.3.2 and JPFs nos. 169, 494) and Jerusalem
tomb or cave 6015 (app. 5.11.3.4 and JPF no. 439). There is
no real evidence for the use of pairs of figurines, i.e.,
combinations of one female JPF and one male figurine. This
is also clear from the scarcity of male figurines in
comparison with the many JPFs. Hence, the JPFs did not
have a male counterpart, at least not in clay (nor in metal,
cf. X.7.3 below).
c. Horse-and-Rider Figurines
An obviously male figure is that of the horse-and-rider
figurines (henceforward HRs for short).16 HRs figurines
have been found with JPFs together in the same loci in a
number of cases, as follows: 1. Arad locus 380 (HR 80 and
JPF 448); 2. Beth Shemesh room 373 (HR 4 and JPF 17); 3.
Beth Shemesh cistern 25 (HR 3 and JPFs 10, 29); 4. The
pool at Gibeon; 5. Jerusalem cave I (HRs 31, 35, 36, 50, 64,
68, 71; for the JPFs see app. 1 and chap. VIII); 6. Lachish
tomb 1002 (Hrs 75, 76 and JPFs 76-78,81); 7. Lachish tomb
106 (HR 77 and JPFs 75, 80, 82); 8. Tel Beer Sheba street
38 (HR 224 and JPFs 257, 470); 9. Tel en-Nasbeh cistern
IS It is logical to include these, since the number of male figurines
among the clear cases is meager.
16 Discussed in chapter IV and app. 6-7 of the original Ph.D. work
(Hebrew, 1995).
65
216 (one HR from the list of Zorn and JPFs 169, 494); 10.
Tel en-Nasbeh rooms 408+402 (HR 148 and JPF 92); lI.
Tel en-Nasbeh room 513 (HR 105 and JPF "0"); 12. Tel en-
Nasbeh cistern 370 (HR 147 and JPF 494).
Wenning (1991) claimed that the HRs and the JPFs
represented a pair of gods, but the archaeological evidence
does not support this claim. Most of the "groups" of HRs
and JPFs are from general, mass locations, e.g., cisterns,
pools, streets and mass-burials. These loci do not prove a
real, direct relation between these two types of figurines.
Against the dozen "groups" (above) there are hundreds of
figurines from both types, that were found separately. There
could have been some connection between the JPFs and the
HRs, but it was not a very binding one.
D. Animal Figurines
Animal figurines form the majority of figurines in almost
any assemblage of figurines from Israel. I have registered
some cases where animal figurines were found together with
JPFs in the same loci (app. 2: 18, 22?, 23, 25, 29, 41, 80,
128,197,198,218,266,459,461,462,467,468). No doubt
this is a very partial registration. Many details are missing
for early excavations, while recently found figurines are not
yet fully published. So far there is no proof for a direct
connection between animal figurines and JPFs, such as a
building loci where two whole figurines of these types were
found together. In many loci, only one JPF was found alone.
Most of the "groups" listed above are derived from mass
locations, which do not prove direct relations. Therefore,
there is no archaeological proof for the assumption that the
animal figurines were attributes of the JPFs (if the last
represented a goddess), though it is not impossible (for
animals and gods cf. Gorg 1993). A close study of the
species of the animal figurines will help to provide an
answer (most of them represent household animals, such as
equids and cattle, but many are very schematic). I have
found no meaningful relation between the JPFs and the
hollow, zoomorphic vessels. The last are not very common,
and some of them seem to be earlier than the JPFs.
E. Bird Figurines
Many scholars claimed that bird (dove?) figurines are
related to a popular - or common - religion, and that they
were an attribute, or a symbol, of the Biblical Asherah (for
an iconographic study see Keel 1977). For that reason, I
selected the bird figurines for a closer study, based on the
data in app. 5.11.2 (birds with pillar bases); on Holland's
thesis (birds without pillar bases, Holland 1975: types E.lI-
E.III) and on recent material from new excavations and
publications. Altogether, these sources produced ca. 50
solid bird figurines from Judah. Other types appear in
neighboring areas, but I will not discuss these, because they
have no direct archaeological contact with the JPFs. In nine
cases, JPFs and bird figurines were found together:
1. Beth Shemesh tomb 1 (app. 5.11.2.13 and JPFs nos. 13,
15).
2. Beth Shemesh room 373 (app. 5.11.2.17 and JPF 17).
3. Beth Shemesh room 374 (app. 5.11.2.14 and JPF 14).
4. Jerusalem cave 1 (seven bird figurines, Jerusalem 11:48;
for the JPFs consult app. 1).
5. Lachish tomb 1002 (app. 5.11.2.15 and JPFs 76, 78, 81).
6. Arad locus 450 (head of a bird, reg. no. c456/1, not yet
published, and JPF 451. It is not certain that the two
originate from the same level).
7. Tel en-Nasbeh cistern 159 (app. 5.11.2.17 and JPFs 142,
170,179,180).
8. Tel Beit Mirsim pit 33A.15 (app. 5.11.2.27 and JPF 232).
9. Tel Beit Mirsim locus NW.32-13 (JPF 205 and a bird
figurine, TBM III: pI. 58; Holland 1975: E.II1.34).
In relation to the rather limited number of bird figurines
from Judah, this is substantial evidence for some sort of
relationship. But again, most of it is from mass locations,
which do not indicate real groups, nor clarify the nature of
the supposed relationship.
VIII.S.2. Relation to Other Finds
(app. 1, field "LFIND")
105 JPFs were registered in field "LFIND", i.e., they were
found with other artifacts. This is a very preliminary
registration, limiting the ability to draw conclusions. 103
JPFs were registered as having been found with daily pottery
vessels, but as noted earlier, this does not contribute much to
our understanding. Sometimes, JPFs were found together
with Imlk seal impressions (app. 2: 23, 87, 89, 168, 169,
484-486); with jewelery (app. 2: 7); with weapons (app. 2:
10, 13, 303, 305, 308) and with inscribed weights (app. 2:
142, 169, 225). Most of these "groups" are from mass loci
and not really indicative. Furthermore, the quantity of loci
with these "groups" is small, not exceeding what can
naturally be expected from finds of the same period (Iron
Age II) and place (Judah).
A. Cult Vessels
The problem is, of course, how to define cultic vessels. If we
do not want to beg the question, we should limit the
definition to the really clear objects: stone altars, large
fenestrated cultic stands, and standing stones ("m:l~y')").
JPFs were found with these finds in the same loci only in
very few cases. I have found four places where JPFs were
found with cult stands: 1. JPF 133 (from a cistern); 2. JPF
238 (in a room), 3. JPF 18 (in doubt). 4. The JPFs from
Jerusalem cave 1 (but cf. chap. VIllA above). Only one JPF
was registered with a standing stone (app. 2: 32 from Beth
Shemesh, room 305). This stone was called "beatyl", but is
probably a regular building stone and not a real "standing
stone". Add now one JPF head from Lahav (app. 2: 238,
Jacobs 1992; already discussed in chap. VIII.3 above). One
must remember that the quantity of these cult objects is very
small.
Clay rattles should perhaps be added here, since these
musical instruments could have been related to religious
66
rituals (cf. Rystedt 1992). Of course, rattles could be used for (extent of excavations, relative wealth of sites, methods of contexts. Heads of type A were not found in courts, while
music without religious connotations. Rattles were found excavation and publication, etc.). As a general impression, it heads of type B were not found in fills. These and other
near JPFs nos. 41, 169,439, but from mass loci (tombs and seems that the JPFs were found in similar contexts in every minor "differences" seem accidental, and probably reflect
cisterns), which are not very helpful. region of Judah, i.e., there are no apparent regional only the incomplete information at the moment. As far as
differences (such as certain contexts which appear in one the contexts can testify, there does not seem to be any
specific region but not in another). difference of function between hand-made heads (type A)
B. Miniature Models of Furniture and moulded heads (type B). Probably both types
Following the present data (figs. 31-32), the main sub-types represented the same figure.
At least 11 JPFs were found with clay models of furniture in of the JPFs (A-B-C) are well devided between the varied
the same loci (app. 2: nos. 13, 15, 32, 142, 197, 198, 217,
218,232,252,259). Most of these are from pits or tombs,
i.e., general locations, but a few were found in domestic loci
at several sites. Miniature models of furniture, usually
beds, are known from very early periods in the ancient Near
East (Spycket 1992: chap. VI: nos. 735-743; chap VII: nos.
1307-1369). They appear in Israel in the Early Bronze Age,
perhaps representing birth stools (Beck 1993). In
Mesopotamia, they are found in both temples and domestic
buildings, starting with the Early Dynasty period (Cholidis
1992:172ff, 180ff; for a short review cr. Dietrich 1992, UF
24:499). Sometimes, figurines of naked women and even
couples in erotic positions are applied to these beds, but it is
not clear if these represented mortal persons, or supernatural
figures (Cholidis 1992:175ff; for beds in the OT see
Weippert 1976).
It is interesting that the Late Bronze age and Iron I age
plaque figurines include a group of figurines, which
probably portray women lying on beds (Tadmor, M. 1982).
The origin of this group is Egypt, where similar figures
appear as both figurines and in wall scenes (cf. chap. X.7.4
below). One can also refer to the "Ashdoda" figurine, whose
body is shaped as a bed (app. 5.1Y.4.1). If the miniature
models represented birth stools, does it indicate that the
JPFs are connected with birth? It is possible, but then why
is the lower body of the JPFs so schematic? These clay
models from Iron Age Judah are also much less common
than the JPFs, thus they could not really form "pairs". So
far, only few loci exhibit remains of both a JPF and a clay
model. There is not even one case where a figurine was
actually found standing on such a bed (the JPFs could not lie
on the beds because of their round bases). On the other
hand, it is not necessary for the figurines to actually stand
on the beds. Perhaps they stood nearby and "endowed" the
beds without direct physical contact. Much more material is
needed, especially whole figurines from "living" loci (such
as app. 2:252), before we will be able to achieve clear
answers in these matters.
VIII. 6. The Context in relation to
Date, Distribution and Typology
The study of context in relation to date, distribution and
typology is rather brief - we simply do not have the required
data for such a study, and must leave it for the future.
Regarding date, we lack the ability to compare between
assemblages of the 8th and the 7th centuries BC (chap. IV
above), not to speak of inner phasing within each century.
Many factors can be involved in the distribution pattern
67

Chapter IX: Analogies to the Judean Pillar Figurines?
"Claypit, clay pit, you are the clay pit ofAnu and Enlil,
the clay pit ofEa, lord ofthe deep, the clay pit ofthe great gods...
your gift you have received, and so, in the morning before lama'! I pinch off
the clay ofNN son ofNN; may it be profitable, may what I do prosper"...
(Wiggermann 1992: 13, text I: 151-157).
IX.t. The Use of Analogies
In the former chapters, I have often mentioned other types of
figurines, albeit briefly. The only exception concerned the
typology, where I classified a large quantity of other
figurines (chap. III and app. 4-5), though I have been careful
not to use these figurines as a direct analogy to the JPFs. In
other chapters, e.g., while discussing the relations between
the distribution of the JPFs and the borders of Judah, there
was no need to make analogies.
Analogy may contribute to this study, if the group which is
used for analogy can furnish clear evidence on the subject
for which it is evoked for comparison. In other words, there
is little sense in comparing one group of finds to another
group, which is even less well known. A comparison
between two unknowns will not help. One should also bear
in mind that analogies can never constitute proof, but only
serve as a tool for bringing up suggestions and possibilities.
I have tried to find analogies from places and periods as
close as possible to the JPFs, since larger temporal and
geographical distances usually weaken analogies. I will not
discuss figurines made of other materials (such as stone or
metal), large scale sculpture and other forms of art (such as
seal impressions and carved ivories). Of course, with a motif
as common as the JPFs, analogies can be found in all of
these fields. Indeed, extensive analogies were offered by
scholars of the "iconographic school" (chap. III.4.7 above),
but their success in explaining the JPFs is questionable.
IX.2. Inscribed Figurines with
Known Functions
Very few small clay figurines from the ancient world carry
inscriptions that clarify their function (or at least partially).
In a few other cases, written evidence can indicate the
function of such figurines although they may not be
inscribed themselves. Following are a few examples.
IX.2.1. Egypt
Two Egyptian figurines of a woman with a child from the
second millennium BC carry inscriptions that indicate that
they were used in order to encourage birth. The origin of
these two figurines is unknown. The first figurine is made of
limestone and exhibited today in Berlin (reg. no. 14517). Its
inscription is an appeal: "may you grant birth (or
68
conception) to your daughter, Seh". It seems that the appeal
was made to the dead father, asking him to help his
daughter and thus secure the continuation of his family in
future generations (Noblecourt 1953:37-39; Tooley 1991).
The second figurine is now in the Louvre. It is inscribed
with a wish addressed to the KA of NN, to endow birth to a
women named Tita (Noblecourt 1953:37-39). Noblecourt
explained these figurines as concubines, but today ~e
tendency is to see them as fertility figurines, related WIth
birth (Pinch 1983; Pinch 1993). Small (uninscribed)
figurines from the temple of Gebel el-Zeit were explain~d as
representations of the goddess Hathor (posener-Krieger
1985:297f; Gamer-Wallert 1992:90).
A figure of a naked female, standing on a lion, is depicted
on the famous Egyptian stele from Winchester college
(England). The figure holds a lotus (and a snake?) and
probably wears a crown. On her side, three names are
inscribed: Kudshu, Astarte and Anat. The relation between
the scene and the inscribed names is not so simple. Does the
figure represent all of the goddesses, or only one? Some
would claim that all these goddesses are forms of one
"basic" goddess (for the stele see Wiggins 1991:386ff, fig. 1;
Hadley 1994: n.64, with further literature there). I mention
this stele only to show that in certain cases even an
inscription does not solve all the problems.
There is a figurine of "Isis with Horus on her knees" in the
Cairo Museum. It probably dates to the sixth century BC,
and carries a Phoenician dedication: "to my lady, to
Astarte" (/lmnl!J)l~ m:l'~/I. See Lipinski 1984:109f, nn.
139-141; museum no. CGC.39291).
Egyptian figurines of cows are sometimes inscribed with the
name of Hathor (pinch 1993:161f), since the cow is an
attributive animal of this goddess. Finally, figurines for
"magic" uses are well known from Egypt, and a few are
inscribed (for further discussion, see chap. IX.3 below).
IX.2.2. Mesopotamia
Figurines of gods were placed in foundation deposits of
temples, and texts indicate the ways of producing and
depositing such figurines. The figurines were meant to
protect the temple from storms. They vary between 10-20
em. in height, and carry a formula: "The vizier of the gods,
the leader who conquers all the storms". These figurines
may represent a minor god called Ninhibur (Borger 1976;
cf. also Green, AR. 1988).
Figurines were used for a wide variety of magical functions
in Mesopotamia. Sometimes such figurines were inscribed
(discussedin detail in chap. IX.3 below).
IX.2.3. The Seville Figurine
The Museo Arqueologico de Seville (Spain) acquired a
small bronze figurine in 1963. It depicts a naked, sitting
female, but its origin is unknown. The head of this figurine
is quite similar to heads of the "women at the window"
ivories and to Phoenician clay figurines (cf. app. 5.VI.1-2,
5.VI.5 below). On the base there is a Phoenician inscription,
dated by Cross to the 8th century BC. Other scholars lower
the date to the 7th or 6th centuries BC. This inscription
tells us that two brothers dedicated this figurine to the
goddess "tzltrtl}r" (line 4), which fulfilled their wish. It is
not clear if "I}r" means the l:Iurrians, the region Hurru (i.e.,
Syro-Phoenician coast), or a cave (Cross 1971; Teixsidor
1975; Lipniski 1984; Hvidberg-Hansen 1986:172;
Ammerman 1991:219; Vance 1994:118; Lemaire 1994:130,
132). Recently, Puech (1993) suggested that "hr" means a
window, thus reading "Astarte in the window".
IX.2.4. Classical Literature
There is evidence in classical sources about putting small
figurines in temples as dedications to the gods (Romano
1988:128; Alroth 1988:195). From one source at least, it is
clear that the figurine represented the goddess:
"To thee I dedicated a very beautiful image of thy form,
Cypris, since I have nothing better than thy form..."
(Ammerman 1991:203; cf. Romano 1988).1
Atheneaus tells a story about a merchant named Herostratos
from Naukratis, who bought a small figurine (or statuette) of
Aphrodite while visiting her temple at Paphos. On his way
back to Egypt by ship, a storm broke, and Herostratos and
his friends prayed to the figurine, asking the help of the
goddess. The storm subsided. After reaching Egypt safely,
Herostratus dedicated the figurines to Aphrodite in a temple
at Naukratis (Ammerman 1991:223, Atheneaus 16:675).
Even if this story is only a legend, it is most interesting. It
shows that small figurines were manufactured in relation
with temples and sold to private peoples. These figurines
could be dedicated at temples (cf Alroth 1989). At times of
crisis, the small figurine could "personify" the goddess; but
'probably at other times Herostratos and his friends would
apply not to a figurine, but to large cult statues in the
temples. From the story it is clear that, at least in this case,
the figurine represented the goddess (and not women
venerating her).
1 Female figurines appear on fronts of clay models of shrines.
These were explained as goddesses, but they are not free standing
figurines and, as far as I know, none carries an inscription (Culican
1976; Seeden 1979:15,23; Mazar, A. I 985b; Bretschneider 1991).
69
IX.2.5. The Fragment from Samaria
As far as I know, only one fragment (among the thousands
of figurines and figurine fragments from Iron Age Israel)
carries an inscription. It is the head of a horse from
Samaria,. which carries one word inscribed before firing:
"(7N ?iJlY~". This is presumably a private name (to cz[I?]),
which marks the ownership (Samaria III:16, no. 3, pI. 1:3a-
3b; 81: no. 29). It strengthens the assumption that the
figurines were owned by individuals.
IX.2.6. Conclusions
The inscribed figurines testify that female figurines served a
wide range of functions in the ancient period. Some
represented goddesses and could even replace large c~t
statues in times of crisis; other figunnes were votive
dedications in the form of the gods (but possibly in the
forms of venerating women as well). Yet other figurines
were used for so-called magical purposes (see below). I have
not found inscribed figurines that were used as toys or as
initiation figures (cf. Voigt 1983). It is perfectly possible
that they existed, since one can hardly expect to find
explanatory inscriptions on such objects.
IX.3. The Magical Use of Small
Figurines
IX.3.t. Egypt
Recently, Ritner (1993) offered a thorough discussion ~f
magic in ancient Egypt. Ritner stressed the fact that magic
was legitimate in Egypt, and practiced even by priests and
kings. For example, Papyrus Lee deals with a conspiracy
against Ramesses III, and blames the rebels (among other
things) not for practising magic, but for using it a~ainst the
king. As a matter of fact, the rebels used the magical books
of the King himself (Ritner 1993:13 n.46; 199ft). Magic
and religion were two sides of the same coin (ibid:28), and
there was even a god of magic with his own cult (HK',
ibid:14ft). Indeed, magic could have been effective in a
society that believed it (ibid:189). One can not differenti~te
between private and public magic (ibid:183). The official
priests were in fact those who practiced magic, since they
knew how to read and write. They also controlled the
magical scripts, held in "the house of life" in the temples
(Ritner 1993:204ff, 220ft). The same magical document
could be used for both royal needs and private needs. Verbal
magic (spells) were as important as the material expression
(the rituals), quite the opposite of the common tendency
evident in modem anthropological studies (ibid:68). The
attitude towards magic changed into a negative one only
with the Roman conquest, when magic became an
underground, illegal occupation (ibid:217ft).
Ritner showed the widespread use of figurines for magical
purposes in Egypt. One use was the making of enemy
figurines from various materials, and then mutilating or
melting them in the course of a ritual (Ritner 1993:113:tl).
This act symbolized the killing and annihilation of the
enemy (wax figurines and their melting - ibid:199ff, 158f,
209, n. 968. Clay figurines - ibid:153ff. Stone figurines -
ibid: 116 Beheading figurines - ibid:161f). This custom
continued during many periods and well into Roman times,
as one bound female figurine stabbed by metal arrows
shows (ibid: 112 fig. 2; cf. similar figurines from Maresha:
Bliss and Macalister 1902:154ff, pl. 85). Sometimes the
figurines were buried (Ritner 1993: 172:tl). Figurines made
by priests were found in foundation deposits (ibid: 13, n.48)
and two female figurines were found in a "magicians" box
(ibid: 222:tl). The coffin texts give examples for making
such figurines:
"To be spoken over a figure of the foe made of wax and
inscribed with the name of that foe on his breast. .. to be put
up in the ground..." (Ritner 1993:173, Coffin texts spell 37).
The best example of magical figurines in Egypt are the
execration figurines, especially from Mirgissa (2nd
millennium BC). These figurines are often inscribed with
the names of the enemies and formulas against them (Ritner
1993:137-140). They were probably called rs.t in Egyptian
(ibid:187ff, fig. 17). They were made by the ruling regime
and used against potential enemies of the Egyptian state
(ibid:141). The texts inscribed on the figurines are not
magical, but the figurines were used in rituals involving
their being "killed" by burying, melting, burning, etc.
(ibid:148-153; Koenig 1990; Grimal 1985). Often, the
faces of the figurines were mutilated, to prevent them from
taking action (Ritner 1993: nn. 671-675). Similar figurines
also served private people in Egypt, and were found in
private tombs (ibid: 149 n. 671, 183f).
IX.3.2. Mesopotamia
Many sources indicate the use of small figurines for magic
in Mesopotamia and in the Hittite empire, and their remains
were found in excavations (Black and Green 1992:81f).
They represented varied figures: gods, demons and
mythological figures. Some were made in anthropomorphic
forms, others were a mixture of anthropomorphic and
animal forms, and yet others had purely animal shapes.
From written sources, we learn that figurines were made for
"black magic", shaped as enemies or victims. To
conterclaim them, wax or clay figurines in the shape of the
black "sorcerers" were manufactured. These were burnt by
fire or drowned in a river (Gurney 1960; Geller 1989; Black
and Green 1992:81f). Many figurines were buried whole
inside houses, as protectors of the houses. These figurines
were sometimes found in excavations (Rittig 1977; Green,
A. 1983; 1985; 1988; Green and Black 1992; Holloway
1992:198ff; Wiggerrnann 1992; Green 1994).
A new study deals with ritual texts, the aim of which was to
protect new houses (or houses under construction) from
epidemics and diseases, represented by a varied "army" of
70
different demons (Wiggerrnann 1992). The house could be
protected by complicated rituals, involving interment of
protective figurines (Wiggerrnann 1992:xii).2 The rituals
lasted for a few days and included many purification acts,
preparing the materials, producing the figurines and
purifying the figurines on a river bank. The figurines were
probably endowed with life by performing the "opening of
the mouth" ritual (that was performed for large cult statues
as well). Then the figurines were buried in the house,
combined with more purification acts. The manufacturing
orders of the figurine are very specific. For example:
"Seven statues of sages whose clay is mixed with [wax],
furnished with [wings] and the face of a bird, holding in
their right hand a cl[eaner,] in their left hands a bucket;
they are clad in white paste, and endowed with feathers by
hatchings in the wet paste - you shall make" (Wiggerrnann
1992: text 1, lines 170-173).
In the specific case quoted above, the figures can be
identified with the "guards" on Assyrian reliefs (for the
"cleaner" and the bucket, cf. Wiggerrnann 1992:66:tl).
Other figurines hold branches of dates, clubs, or daggers.
The "names" of the figures were sometimes inscribed on the
shoulder of the figurines, specifying their function (ibid, text
1: lines 195:tl). They represented a vast number of varied
entities: from gods in anthropomorphic forms (Sebettu,
Lugalgirra, Meslamtaea, etc.), through apkallit creatures
shaped as animals (bulls, dogs, snakes, etc.), to all kinds of
monsters and mythic creatures (e.g., lion-man, scorpion-
man, fish-man, Wiggerrnann 1992: text 1:180ff; pp. 46-58;
Green, A. 1994).
A very interesting difference concerns the materials used for
these figurines. Figurines of gods and goddesses were made
of tamarisk, and the gods are called the sons of heaven
(biniU '!am~). On the other hand, demonic creatures are
made of clay, and are related to the earth (ApsG;
Wiggermann 1992: text 1:144, pp. 48, 60, 87). Only one
exception is known, a lesser god which is not made of wood
(Lu/a/, ibid:60). The clothing was also different - the gods
and some of the sages usually wear dresses (represented by
paint), unlike inferior demons (ibid:53ff; for clothes of cult
statues cf. Matsushima 1993:211ff).
The texts specify the exact positions of the figurines in the
house, and there were probably fixed rules in this matter.
Figurines were put alone or in groups in all parts of the
house: the gate, the rooms and tht: courts (Wiggermann
1992:58ff). It seems that gods and. monsters were
concentrated in the outer gate area, appkallii creatures in
living rooms and various monsters (Lu/a/, Latarak)
elsewhere (ibid:99-101).
The figurines found in excavations (e.g., Green A. 1983;
1985; 1988) show that rituals of the kind described in the
written sources were indeed performed. Not every detail in
2 These magical texts are not easy to understand, and are often
obscure and debated by various scholars. Here I have followed the
translations of Wiggermann.
the sources fits the actual figurine - perhaps the
manufacturers had some freedom in their actions (Green A.
1983:92f; 1985; Wiggerrnann 1992:50, 63:tl). Figurines
appear in private houses at AJlur, Ur and other cities. The
archaeological data, especially regarding context, is often
incomplete or problematic, and many figurines cannot be
identified clearly (Wiggerrnann ibid: 631f, 97, I43:tl). We
learn from written sources about the figurines found in
excavations, rather than vice versa.
The rituals described in these texts are complicated and
long, possibly also expensive (producing so many figurines,
clothing them, etc.). It is doubtful whether such rituals were
performed for each house. Perhaps they were used for
houses of the upper classes, while much shorter and cheaper
versions were used for smaller houses.
The texts studied by Wiggerrnann involve protective figures,
i.e., good or "white magic". Even though, some of the
figures have a bad, menacing outer form such as monsters
and demons. This warns us that the outer form does not
necessarily reflect the inner function directly. "Bad"
figurines were also used in Mesopotamia, e.g., figures that
personalized diseases, epidemics, death, and murder
(Wiggerrnann 1992:92). The Maq/b rituals give an example,
in which one made representations of "black magicians" and
"killed" them by burning, breaking, eating, etc. (Abusch
1987-90). It is important to note that protective figurines
were not mutilated; in order to protect the house and its
dwellers, they had to remain whole and were therefore
buried whole. The probable implication for the JPFs is that
if the JPFs represented a good figure (in function, not only
in form), it is unlikely that they would have been
deliberately mutilated (whether they represented gods,
mortal beings or mythical figuresj'
IX.4. Other Female Figurines
The motive of the naked female is widespread throughout
human history, with different meanings for different human
societies (Auerbach 1992:308). Figurines of naked women,
with hands on their chests, are found already by the end of
the third millennium BC in Mesopotamia (ibid:31Of;
Spycket 1992:36, 54, 234). Spycket believes that the
figurines are fitted out according to the customs and
demands of the local populations and, with a few exceptions,
are not connected with other figurines (ibid:227). Wiggins
(1991:392) warned from crossing cultural boundaries, and
Renfrew expressed a similar view: "Religious system of a
given period has to be interpreted primarily in the light of
evidence available for that period, and not on the basis of
subsequent belief systems, however well-documented"
(Renfrew 1985:3).4
3 Mutilation is possible in this case, only if one assumes a
"reform", i.e., an act on behalf of a group of people who deemed
that these figures were bad and not good
4 Cf a similarview of Carless-Hulin (1989:95): "It is preferable to
interpretsymbols within the contextof the host culture, and not on
71
For this reason, I will limit the discussion to female
figurines, especially figurines from geographical areas
which are close to Judah and are from more or less the same
period of time.
IX.4.1. Greece
Small pillar figurines (and other types) were found in
temples, in niches around the altar and sometimes even on
the altar. It seems that some of these figurines represented
goddesses (having a high "polos" hat), while others
represented women venerating (Ammerman 1991:203;
Alroth 1988; for Crete cf. Gesel 1985:61; Van Straten
1992:194). Naked female figurines were cornmon in Greece
and in the Aegean world starting with the 8th-7th centuries
BC, and it is usually assumed that their origin lay in the
Levant (Karageorghis 1987:1-2; Bohrn 1990:119ff; Herrnary
1992; for the eastern influence on Greece during this period
see Burkert 1992:20; Morris, S. P. 1992; Osborne 1993;
Zimansky 1993). This motif is rare in the western
Mediterranean, where it appears during the 7th - 6th
centuries BC, surely coming from the east.
IX.4.2. Cyprus
Cyprus is the richest source of coroplastic art in the Near
East during the Iron Age II period. All scholars agree that
the origin of the naked female motif, as well as the
technique of moulding the face, lay in the Levant. This type
of figurine arrived in Cyprus in the 8th century BC or a little
later. Many scholars believe that Phoenician traders were
responsible for the introduction of these figurines in Cyprus
(Karageorghis 1987:1-2; Yon and Caubet 1988:30;
Ammerman 1991:220ff; S,srenson 1991:23lf; Caubet
1992:261, etc.). There are connections between figurines
from Phoenicia, Israel and Philistia, and figurines from
Cyprus (Bisi 1989; Gubel 1991). The Cypriot figurines of
naked women were usually interpreted as "Astartes", fertility
goddesses or naked goddesses, but this is a copy of the labels
given to similar figurines from the Levant. 5 In this case,
using Cypriot figurines as an analogy for the JPFs is like a
dog chasing its own tail. In Cyprus, many figurines are
found in burials, but also in temples and in domestic
structures.
IX.4.3. Neighboring Areas
The areas nearest to Judah may prove the most important for
comparison. Small clay figurines of naked females appear
in all these areas during the Iron Age II period: Phoenicia,
the basis of visual similarity with other cultures across space and
time, unless an unbroken link can be proven".
5 Similarly, Bronze Age Cypriot plaque figurines were termed
"Astartes" following the Levantine terminology: Orphanides
1990:48, 50ff.

Philistia, Transjordan and Israel. They share with the JPFs
the general motif (standing woman) and technique (the
moulded heads), but there are marked differences in details
(chap. III above, and app. 4-5). There are varied hand
positions among figurines from these areas, but hands on the
chest is a quite common one. These figurines are not the
only type in these areas, and there is a greater variety of
types, at least in Phoenicia and Philistia, in comparison with
Judah (e.g., figurines of musicians, daily scenes, and
pregnant women). Other figurine motifs appear in these
areas as in Judah (horses and riders, animal figurines, etc.),
though there are again marked differences in details. The
Phoenician figurines relate not only to domestic buildings,
but to burials (Achzib) and temples (Sarepta, Pritchard
1988:48f; the Eshmun temple in Sidon: Ganzman et. al.
1987). In that respect, they resemble the Greek world (see
above).
The bad news is that we know less about all these areas,
compared to what we know about Judah. A few examples
will suffice to show this. In Phoenicia, the excavations are
few and the chronology uncertain. Thus, it is not even clear
if the Phoenician figurines preceded their Judean sisters, and
if the technique of the moulded face appeared there for the
first time. Archaeological context and chronology of
Transjordanian figurines are often problematic. The quantity
72
of figurines from the neighboring areas is smaller (at least
for published figurines). While we have the Bible and
Hebrew inscriptions for Judah, we have very little written
evidence for neighbouring areas, such as Philistia or
northern Israel.
The symbolism and function of the figurines from the
surrounding areas are not clearer than that of the JPFs.
Analogy to the former will not solve the problems
concerning the later. Scholars who see the JPFs as
representations of a goddess may claim that similar
goddesses were venerated in all the vicinity, with minor
stylistic variations (Asherah in Judah, Astarte in Phoenicia,
etc.). Other scholars say that it is different facets of one
"basic" goddess (Astarte equals Asherah, equals Anat, etc.,
especially Dever 1990). This raises the question, was there
a great cosmic goddess, a sort of a universal "mother-
goddess" or "general goddess" (see chap. X.3 below)? On
the other hand, there is no difficulty in retaining any other
explanation for the JPFs (magical figurines, toys), assuming
that similar figurines were used for similar purposes in the
neighboring regions.
So long as the meaning of the female figurines from the
neighboring areas is not clear, they cannot solve the
problems concerning the meaning of the JPFs.
Chapter X: Notes About Meaning and Function
"Out ofreluctant matter
What can be gathered? Nothing, beauty at best"
(Cheslav Milosz. The Collected Poems 1931-1987.London 1988.Vicking: 123).
The aim of this chapter is to criticize some of the theories
regarding the JPFs, and support, to a certain extent, other
theories. During the last hundred years, four basic attitudes
crystallized in the study of the JPFs, each advocating a
different explanation. These four basic explanations are: 1.
Toys, used for children's amusement. 2. Mortal women. 3.
Goddesses, whether general (such as "mother goddess",
"fertility goddess" or "nurturing goddess") or specific
(usually Astarte or Asherah). The combination of Anat-
Astarte-Asherah (e.g., Dever 1990, 1994) stands closer to
the conception of a general goddess. 4. Magical figures.
No one has suggested that the JPFs were initiation figures
(cf. Voigt 1983); in any case, initiation rites can perhaps be
considered as part of magical rites (it would be very hard to
distinguish the two in the archaeological record). Similarly,
it is clear that the JPFs cannot be mortuary figures, since
most of them were found in settlements and not in burials.
I will proceed from two basic assumptions. First, that the
JPFs represented one identical figure and not many
individual figures. Second, that the JPFs had one basic
function and not many functions (that could interchange
according to various factors, such as area, period and
context). I will return to these two assumptions later (chap.
X.7.6).
X.I. Toys
The explanation of the JPF as toyss was made in the early
phases of research, but was never very popular. Sometimes
it was applied to a few specific figurines, e.g., Albright for
one pillar figurine of a woman with a child (TBM III:142;
app. 2:232 below). The explanation of toys was often
restricted to zoomorphic figurines, as opposed to
anthropomorphic ones (e.g., Lachish III:374; Kenyon
1967:101; 1974:142; Franken and Franken-Battershill 1963:
139; Burrows 1941:221). Very few scholars thought that all
the figurines were toys (e.g., De-Vaux 1958:82), and some
rejected this explanation completely (May 1939:28).
During the last three decades, the explanation of toys has
not been put forward for the JPFs. Fowler (l985:341f)
mentioned it, but only as a warning against believing that
every figurine was cultic. Otherwise, Fowler did not prove
that ancient figurines were toys, or that the JPFs were in
particular (for further discussion see Ucko 1968:422f; on
children in Mesopotamia see George 1993; on toys in the
Bible see Hallo 1993, but without reference to the JPFs).
Hubner (1993:92fI, fig. 46) is the only modem scholar that
returned to this old explanation, but without any new
substance (cf. chap. 11.4.4 above).
73
73
The cheap material of the JPFs, the mass production, the
popularity in domestic areas and the throwing of fragments
into streets may fit the explanation of toys. The (partial)
nakedness of the JPFs does not negate an explanation as toys
(since modem puppets often have sexual attributes, cf. Voigt
1983:187, 189). Nor does the lack of similar male figurines,
since it is possible that female puppets were used by girls,
while boys refrained from using any sort of puppets. Yet,
other facts do not accord with this explanation.
Firstly, JPFs were found in public buildings, where we
would not expect to find children's toys (storehouses in Tel
Beer Sheba and Tel Ira, the temple area in Arad, the public
buildings of Ramat Rahel). Secondly, the overwhelming
uniformity - indeed, even stereotyping - of shape does not fit
toys. We would expect toys to have a more individual
character, either by manufacture or decoration, or through
wear by children's handling. Thirdly, the crude manufacture
and lack of decorations on the back side of the JPFs indicate
that they were meant to be seen from the front, i.e., to stand
in a rather static position (perhaps with their back against
walls or pieces of furniture). This does not fit toys, which
are used for dynamic playing. Fourthly, the JPFs are very
vulnerable, while toys require the ability to sustain the wear
and tear of playing (if this was needed, better clay and firing
were possible). Fifthly, at present there is no archaeological
evidence to connect the JPFs with children, or with
children's burials.!
So far, written evidence for the use of figurines as toys in
Iron Age Judah has not been found, and indeed, can hardly
be expected. In any case, the arguments put forward seem
solid enough to reject the idea that the JPFs were children's
toys, There is a growing tendency to reject this explanation
in regard to other ancient Near Eastern figurines (e.g., in
Egypt: Tooley 1991; orin Greece: Gates 1992:169).
X.2. Representations of Mortal
Women
The idea that the JPFs represented mortal women has been
almost completely ignored, at least in writing. Pritchard
(1943:86) raised this possibility, but only as a tentative
option, and it was rather superseded by the idea that the
JPFs were goddesses. Hachlili made this suggestion for
figurines from Ashdod, because their many variations of
1 When speaking of toys, I mean children's toys by definition. We,
adults, also have "toys" - only we call these gods or magical
figures. Therefore, though the separation of children's toys from
adult's toys may not be absolute, it can certainly be used in
archaeology and is not artificial.
shape may imply different women, and not one goddess
(Ashdod Il-Ill: 132). The JPFs from Jerusalem cave I were
explained as representations of women, who came to the
cave to seek help in birth or disease (Jerusalem II: 128; it is
quite close to an explanation of magical figures, for which
see X.6 below). Perhaps the theory that the JPFs represented
mortal women is not appealing, because it lacks the glamour
that mysterious magic, or prestigious Israelite religion, have.
But is this theory acceptable?
There are some doubts regarding the explanation of mortal
women. The great physical and technical uniformity (clay,
white wash, decoration, position of hands, schematic lower
body) seem to imply the lack of any effort in representing
individual women. Even the heads are very uniform. True,
ancient art stressed types and not individual portraits,
especially when not dealing with gods, kings, queens and
the like. The JPFs were probably used separately and not in
groups (chap. VIllA above). This hints that they symbolized
the same figure, and not many individual women. The
possibility that the JPFs represented mortal figures of
"fertility" does not fit the lack of pregnancy, children and
rendering of the pubic area. Finally, Understanding the JPFs
as mortal women does not solve our problem. It gives a title,
but not the meaning. Who exactly were these women? Why
were they represented in large quantities? How do we
explain their wide distribution in all sorts of contexts?
Theoretically, it is possible that such mortal figures were
made without any deep meaning, but for aesthetic reasons
only. This explanation was never suggested, perhaps
because it is so simple; everyone tried to find a hidden
meaning! From an archaeological point of view, it is
extremely hard to test such a theory, since with only
"fashion" for meaning and function, any archaeological
context is possible. But an explanation of mortal women
without symbolism does not fit what we know about ancient
art, which was a rigid way of expressing (mainly) royal and
religious messages.
On the other hand, if the JPFs had some symbolic meaning,
they had to "act an action", even if only a symbolic one. This
makes them very similar to the so-called magical figures (cf.
part X.6 below). Also, we must return to the former
questions of who is symbolized by these women and why?
In other words, seeing the JPFs as mortal women cannot
constitute a full explanation, since it does not answer the
question of what the meaning of such figurines was.
X.3. Mother Goddess, Fertility
Goddess, Nurturing Goddess and
Naked Goddess
Many scholars suggested that the JPFs represented female
goddesses, but did not try to identify them with specific
goddesses, believing that this was impossible (pritchard
1943; HUbner 1985:53; Miller 1986:245; Barkay 1990:191).
Other scholars continued to use "general terms", though
they identified the JPFs with a specific goddess. The term
74
"mother goddess" was most widely used, and often related to
fertility (Duncan 1924:180; May 1935:27; Burrows
1941:221; Wright 1957:118; Kenyon 1967:101; Heaton
1974:232; Dever 1982:38; 1990:137; Keel and Uehlinger
1992:381). A few scholars used this term for convenience
sake only (Holland 1975:124; Holladay 1987:278). Yet other
scholars stressed the fertility aspect, especially in regard to
animal figurines (TBM ill:82; Hooke 1938:25; Mazar
1990:501; TN 1:247; Jerusalem II: 128): It was hard to see
all the small animal figurines as gods, in opposition to
anthropomorphic figurines.
The terms "nurturing goddess" or "suckling goddess" were
used by many scholars for the JPFs (TN 1:245; Macalister
1912:417; Reifenberg 1927:97; Supinska-Lovset 1978:2lf;
Holladay 1987:278; Wenning 1991:91; Keel and Uehlinger
1992:380f). The term "naked goddess" was less popular
(Watzinger 1933:117; Lachish ill:374), and adopted mainly
within the iconographic school of thought, which also
coined the term "the Syrian goddess" as a universal entity
(Winter 1983:127ff, 131, 192-199; Briend 1992:27).
It seems to me that all these terms are vague and contribute
nothing to the understanding of the JPFs. The reasons for
this are explained below.
X.3.t. "Mother Goddess" and "Fertility
Goddess"
The notion of a prehistoric "mother goddess" was very
widespread at the end of the last century and the beginning
of this century, together with the idea of fertility. It was
believed that prehistoric figurines represented a goddess, but
without written sources this goddess could not be named
(Ucko 1968:409-416). Complex theories were built on the
idea of a general "mother goddess", especially for Europe
and the Mediterranean areas. Scholars even reconstructed
matriarchal societies ruled by women and later suppressed
by males, on the basis of the female "mother goddess". How
absurd this is can be seen from the JPFs; they are all female,
but the Bible shows that Judean society was dominated by
men. That is, the sex of the small figurines tells us very little
about the status of the sexes in ancient societies.
Many scholars criticized sharply such "mother goddess"
theories (Franken and Franken-Battershill 1963:144f; Ucko
/1
1968:417ff; Orphanides 1990:45f; ~I'iggins 1991:392; Day
1992:181, 185; Walls 1992:15; Bailey 1994). Lemche
(1992:253, nn. 26-27) even went as far asto define the ide
of fertility in Biblical studies as a modem, post Freudian
bias. Every one of the major known goddesses in the
ancient Near East was a "mother goddess" in that she mixed
motherly and divine characteristics, much as every male god
is, by definition, a "father god". 2 Gods, as imaginary
E I
creations of the human race, cannot be completely detached
2 Yet, we do not hear scholars speaking about a general "father
god" of unknown name, and of extensive spheres of influence (in
the context of Judah). Does the existence of such a Judean "father
god" depend upon finding small figurines?
from human mortal life, and reflects aspects of the later as a
mirror. Any scholar who explains the JPFs as a goddess
must strive to identify this goddess specifically. If he/she
believes that it cannot be done, then adding "mother" and
"fertility" to the definition "goddess" contributes nothing.
There is much more to be said. During the Iron Age II
period, several goddesses are known from Judah and the
neighbouring kingdoms (e.g., Astarte, Asherah). Never do
we hear about some "general mother goddess", worshipped
by everyone. Is it possible that another major goddess
existed in Iron Age II Judah, without being mentioned in
any written source (including the OT)? Furthermore, is it
conceivable that the only feature of this goddess is that she
is "a mother goddess", in other words, lacking any
characteristics (since she is 'just like any other goddess")?
The same is true also for the term fertility and its abuse: it is
such a vague term, and every goddess has some kind of
fertility. 3 It is worth quoting the expression of Handy about
the idea of a "mother-goddess":
"a topic, overused since the nineteenth century, which is
"in" now, but it is a lazy way to deal with the variety of
female deities known from the ancient world" (Handy
1993:158).
X.3.2. "Syrian Goddess"
This term, popular with the iconographic school, is even
more problematic. I have already referred to the problems
of mixing sources from nearly 2000 years and treating the
whole Near East as one cultural unity (chapter 11.4.7 above).
Furthermore, what is Syrian in the JPFs? They have no
relation, whatsoever, with Syria. As long as the JPFs are
discussed, this term is misleading and must be discarded
forthwith.
X.3.3. "Naked Goddess", "Nurturing
Goddess", "Suckling Goddess"
The term "naked goddess" is similar to that of "mother
goddess", and related with fertility. The "naked goddess"
was identified mainly in Syrian seal impressions and plaque
figurines of the second millennium BC as the "rain
goddess", mate of the storm god (Blocher 1987; Van Loon
1990; Auerbach 1992). Even if the identification of the
Syrian seal impressions is correct, what is their relation to
Judean figurines from the later Iron Age period? The JPFs
are only partially naked, and have very schematic lower
bodies. Furthermore, the term "naked goddess" and the
likes may describe the figure superficially, but does not
really explain it (like "fertility" or "mother goddess"). These
are all very vague terms, since almost any goddess has some
, aspect of motherhood. Any goddess is a mother, thus her
I
3 For example, the Greek goddesses: "almost every single Greek
goddess has a fertility aspect of one kind or another" (Hadzisteliou-
Price 1978:3; for fertility cult cf. Bonanno 1986).
75
believers are her "children". It is such a basic idiom in
almost any human society. As far as the JPFs are concerned,
there is hardly an indication of motherhood (except one
figurine, app. 2: 232, which carries a child on its back - but
it is the only one among 854 JPFs).
Behind terms such as "mother goddess", "fertility goddess",
"nurturing goddess" and "naked goddess" lies the
assumption that there existed a certain great cosmic goddess
or "general goddess", worshipped by a large number of
societies. This goddess was usually related to the prehistoric
periods. Perhaps she could have some minor temporal and
geographic variations, but it was claimed that she was one
"basic" goddess. In my view, this theory cannot be accepted
for Iron Age II Judah. There may have been syncretism and
influences between different goddesses at different places.
There may have been common origins in some distant past.
But, once a population adopts a goddess at a certain time
and place, it cannot be "a general goddess"; it is adopted for
the specific needs and circumstances of a specific
population, thus becoming unique. That goddess is not
identical with any other goddess, although she may have
similar traits, a similar "history", or a similar physical form.
After all, there must be some general similarity between all
the goddesses (all this holds true for gods as well, and is not
meant to be discriminative in any way).
If we reject the idea of a "great cosmic goddess", we must
also deny the terms "mother goddess", "fertility goddess"
and the likes. The main question is do the JPFs represent a
goddess? If not, then all these terms are groundless. If the
JPFs do represent a goddess, then there is no escape from
trying to identify a specific goddess (see above). It is thus
clear that these vague terms are superfluous in any way, and
we would do much better without them.
X.4. Astarte, Anat and
Astarte-Anat-Asherah
Many scholars identified the JPFs with the goddess Astarte,"
beginning with the early stages of research (Vincent
1907:161; Gezer II:412; Driver 1922:33ff; Pilz 1924:161,
166). At first, the name was used for both plaque figurines
and pillar figurines, but later some scholars termed only the
plaque figurines as "Astartes" (patai 1967:58-60, 98ft).
Many scholars used the name Astarte only for convenience
sake, as a general name for the JPFs, without really claiming
that they represented the goddess Astarte (Barkay 1990:191;
Phytian-Adams 1923:80; Watzinger 1933:117, photo; TN
1:245, 273; TBM III:138; Holland 1975:42, 62, 97; Holland
1977:154; Kyle 1977:76; Aharoni 1978: photo 37; Keisan
1:350; Mazar 1990:501; Jeremias 1993:44). Some scholars
created an amusing situation, by calling the JPFs Astarte on
one hand, but explaining them as Asherah on the other hand
(Ahlstrom 1963:53f; 1984:138; Oded 1994:126f).
4 I am using the more common English spelling Astarte, though the
Biblical form "Ashtoret" is more appropriate for figurines from
Judah.
During the last few decades, the Astarte explanation lost its
popularity. Today Astarte is mentioned in relation to the
JPFs mainly as part of a combination of the goddesses
Astarte, Anat and Asherah together, by scholars who claim
that all these goddesses were, more or less, the same goddess
(Dever 1982:38; 1987:226f, nos. 1-3; 1990:157f; 1994;
Hestrin 1987; Hvidberg-Hanson 1986:176, etc.). There is
no need to review here the written sources about these
goddesses, already studied in detail elsewhere. 5 None of
the scholars identified the JPFs with Anat along, since it is
clear that Anat flourished mainly during the second
millennium BC (on Anat see Hvidberg-Hansen 1986: 172f;
Deem 1978; Smith 1990:61ff; Walls 1992; Day P.L. 1992;
Smith 1994:204, n. 45).
The theory about a combination of Astarte-Anat-Asherah
seems doubtful to me (and cf. already Reed 1949). The OT
and other written sources distinguished explicitly three
goddesses, with different names. It is hard to believe that all
three could be venerated as the same one goddess during the
later Iron Age period (on the other hand, the JPFs are so
uniform that they can hardly represent three different
goddesses, since how would the users know which is
which?). Furthermore, there are differences in time and
space between these goddesses, though our sources are not
always clear or reliable. Anat was mainly a Cana'anite
goddess of the second millennium BC. Astarte was mainly
associated with Phoenicia and the kingdom of Israel, and
not with Judah. Asherah was mainly a local Judean and
Israelite entity of the first millennium BC (Lemaire
1994:134; cf. Day, P.L. 1992; Wiggins 1991). Therefore,
Anat and Astarte do not fit the obvious Judean definition of
the JPFs (against the identification with Astarte cf. already
Franken and Franken-Battershill 1963: 145f).
X. 5. Asherah
The view that the JPFs represented the Biblical Asherah is
the most popular explanation today, therefore I have named
the present phase of research "the Asherah phase" (chap.
IIA above). The debates about the exact nature of the
Biblical Asherah find expression in regard to the JPFs, as
variations in the meaning attached to these figurines
(whether as a phenomenon of official religion, a forbidden
or non-conformist cult, a house-cult or expressions of
popular religion), but the similarity is greater than the
differences (patai 1967:35, 43, 60; Engle 1979:27ff, 50-52,
80; Dever 1982:37; Ahlstrom 1982; 1984:136; Teubal
1984:91; Holladay 1987:278; Gadon 1989:96 photo, 171;
Dever 1990:158f; Wenning 1991:90; Bloch-Smith 1992:
218f, n.16; Dever 1994:120-122). Somewhat exceptional is
the identification of the bird figurines, rather than the JPFs,
with Asherah (Jerusalem II: 127f, fig. 7:4). The logic behind
5 For Asherah see chapter X.5 below. On Astarte see Leclant
1960; Fantar 1973; Delcor 1974; Hvidberg-Hansen 1986:171f;
Ammerman 1991:219ff; Day, P.G. 1992; Day, J. 1992; Gorg 1993;
Day, J. 1994:187; Smith 1994:205; Lemaire 1994:129ff; Margalith
1994(on plaque figurines); Davila and Zuckerman 1993 (on a late
inscribed throne,but without a figure).
76
the identification with Asherah is that if the JPFs
represented a goddess, it must have been Asherah. She is the
only likely candidate in later Iron Age Judah, in the light of
her dominant position in the Old Testament (versus any
other goddess) and her appearance beside Yahweh in the
inscriptions from Kh. el-Kom and Kuntillet 'Ajrud (chap.
II.4.11 above).
In the Bible, Asherah is often mentioned as a cultic object
made of wood (connected with the verbs "fell", "smash""
and "burn by fire": Ex. 34:13; Deut. 7:5; 12:13). In Judges
VI, Asherah may have been an actual tree, standing above
or near the altar. In a few verses, it seems that Asherah is a
goddess. During the monarchical period, a /I~O!l1l and a
111lS~!lY.l1I of the Asherah are mentioned. These are moot
terms, but Asherah was clearly part of the official cult of
Judah - she was introduced into the Jerusalem temple by
Judean kings (I Kings 15:13, 33; II Kings 21:7). It seems
that during the Iron Age, or most of this period, Asherah
was a desirable component within the Judean cult and not
an opposed cult or a foreign one. II Kings 18:19 relates
Asherah with Ba'al, but this seems to be a secondary
interpolation (while the "Asherim" of the Chronicler is a
late form, which is historically doubtful). It is possible that
Asherah was considered as a paredos of Yahweh, at least
in some circles. This is currently debated, and the amount
of recent literature on the Asherah is bewildering - from
"solid" scientific monographs and papers to all kinds of
popular literature and bizarre expressions. 6 For our
purposes, the central. question is whether indeed the JPFs
represented Asherah?
This explanation is possible regarding date and distribution.
Asherah is connected in the OT mainly with Judah and
Israel. The female pillar figurines from Israel (different in
details from the JPFs) can be explain as "Israelite Asherah"
(e.g., Dever 1994). The many JPFs in domestic houses may
reflect a common appeal of the Asherah, and there is no
problem in the appearance of a few JPFs in public and
scared locations. The JPFs from pits and cisterns, and the
private ownership of figurines (chaps. VIIIA.l, IX.2.5) can
also fit this explanation. There is no clear evidence for cult
in relation to the JPFs, but neither is the exact form of
veneration of the Biblical Asherah clear (also, there is the
problem of what is cult exactly and how is it expressed in
the archaeological record). The throwing of JPFs as
6 The following list includes impo~t publications on the
Asherah, together with some secondary literature: Reed 1949;
Lemaire 1977; Emerton 1982; Winter 1983; Dever 1984; Pettey
1985;Hvidberg-Hansen 1986:174f;Mendenhal11985; 01yan 1985:
chaps. 2-3, 51fI; Hadley 1987; Hestrin 1987; Schroer 1987:21-45;
Tigay 1987:172flI; Kyle-Macarter 1987:143ff; Koch 1988; Ljung
1989:54-58; Betlyon 1985; North 1989; Dever 1990: chap. 4;
Smith 1990:80-124; Best 1991; Hestrin 1991;Wiggins 1991; Day,
J. 1992; Dearman 1992:79; Dietrich and Loretz 1992; Frymer-
Kensky 1992: chap. 13; Hiibner 1992; Margalith 1994; Whitt
1992; Ikeda 1993; Wiggins 1993; Zeeb 1993; Day, J. 1994:184ff;
Dever 1994; FrettlOh 1994; Hadley 1994; Lemaire 1994:148f;
Smith 1994:198-206. On the new inscription from Ekron see Gitin
1993:250-252; 1995:72.
domestic waste (chap. VIII) may seem a problem, if Asherah
was a high, venerated goddess. But the status of Asherah is
not clear; there is a great difference between disposal
patterns and use-patterns; and the small figurines do not
have the high position of large cult statues. Finally, if the
JPFs represented Asherah, the lack of male god figurines is
intriguing (chap. X,7.3 below).
Many scholars assumed that the pillar bodies of the JPFs
represented a tree - trunk, the assumed form of the Biblical
Asherah. This was another reason for identification between
the two, but it is a completely baseless argument. On one
hand, the OT does not give a specific description of the
Asherah. That she was made of wood is common to cult
statues (and other objects) in the whole ancient Near East.
Living trees may have been her symbol (Judges VI), or
wooden cult objects'? However, there is no definite proof
that she had a pillar body. In Greece, female figurines may
be pillar-shaped, but statues of goddesses are
anthropomorphic (Alroth 1989). On the other hand, the
JPFs' body does not seem to represent a tree. Pillar bodies
are a widespread solution for standing figurines in the Near
East. The widened base is necessary to enable the figurines
to stand safely. Once a round body with a widening base is
used, it is difficult to represent separate legs! Indeed, the
legs "return" when double-moulded figurines, where the
body is fully made in a mould, appear. With rounded pillar
bodies, the only way to show legs is perhaps by incisions or
stamping on the front part of the round body; but this
certainly looks awkward (it is found in one or two figurines,
see app. 5.IV.7.19 below). Furthermore, some of the riders
of the horse-and-rider figurines also have pillar bases. But
these riders stand on horses - surely their body cannot be
connected to trees or poles. Finally, pillar figurines from
Transjordan and Phoenicia are more elaborately rendered,
and a few have painted decorations or a ledge on the body
(cf. app. 4.1.1-2 and fig. 10:1-2). These probably indicate
dresses, which are not a logical outfit for trees.
To summarize briefly, the JPFs may have represented
Asherah, but conclusive evidence is still lacking. If this is
the case for 854 JPFs, with a distribution and date fitting the
Asherah, it is clear that all the other so-called Asherah
objects stand in a worse position. Regrettably, varied
artifacts were called Asherah in a frenzy of publications
during the last decade. Asherah objects multiplied like
mushrooms after the rain, so beware - there are many
poisonous ones.
X.6. A Magical Figure
The notion that the JPFs are magical figurines was
widespread during the early stages of research, when magic
was understood as the complete opposite of religion (and
7 Itis possible that the cult object was shaped as a pillar, but this
is a symbol that should not be directly equated with the goddess.
Also, was Asherah a "high" goddess, and was she expressed in
anthropomorphic cult statues?
77
gods). At that period, scholars who adopted this explanation
thought that the JPFs had no relation whatsoever to Yahweh
and to the official Israelite cult. Usually, the magic was
termed "sympathetic" or "apotropaic", and the figurines
were regarded as amulets for domestic use, or as "good luck
charms" (Hooke 1938:25; TN 1:245, 248; Burrows
1941:220; Wright 1957:118; Ashdod II-III: 133; Heaton
1974:232; Kyle 1977:76; Jerusalem II: 128). A few scholars
suggested magic just as an alternative to seeing every
figurine as a goddess (Fowler 1985). Many scholars fused
the magic explanation with an assumption of deliberate
mutilation of the JPFs (but see chap. VII above; for an
anthropologic discussion of magic see Morris 1987).
In the last decade or so, magic was largely replaced by the
Ashera explanation (cf. Tigay 1986:9lf, though hardly
convincing). The date and the distribution may fit a magical
explanation of the JPFs - one can easily assume that Judah
had its own magic figurines, different to those of
neighboring kingdoms. The context is also fitting, as are
the (probable) private ownership and cheap material (clay).
The disposal as domestic waste (in streets) is at least easier
to understand than if the JPFs represented a high, major
goddess. Disposal in cisterns, pits and silos may fit well
with magical figurines (but the JPFs were not thrown whole,
thus are unlikely to be protecting figures that guaranteed the
water and grain sources).
If the JPFs relate to magic, it seems probable that it is "good
(white) magic". They have "good" outward shape (smile, full
face, "offering" the breasts). They were probably not
mutilated deliberately, and were very popular in many
contexts of life in Judah. The lack of overt sexual features
suggests that they symbolized "plenty" rather then "fertility"
(cf. Wenning 1991:91).
Even so, seeing the JPFs as magical figures meets heavy
opposition on more than one front. There is no
archaeological proof that the JPFs are related to any magic
rituals. True, one need not suppose complex rituals of the
kind documented from Mesopotamia (cf. chap. IX.3 above),
and large parts of rituals will not be found in the
archaeological record (e.g., the use of organic materials and
verbal rituals). The problem is, however, much more
difficult. It relates not only to the question of what is magic
(below), but to the fact that defining the JPFs as magical
figurines is no real solution. This definition gives a function,
but not the meaning. If the JPFs are magical figurines, who
is this figure? Why wasn't it mentioned in the OT - since it
was popular in Judah for at least a hundred years, and the
uniformity of the JPFs implies that we are dealing with one
figure? In other words, the definition as magical figurines
does not give a full answer, but only a functional one
(further discussed below).
X.7. Summary
I wish to mention briefly some topics that have not yet
discussed, in order to clarify a few points and to show the
complexity of others. Following this, I will conclude with a
short summary.
X.7.1. "House Cult"
The cult in Judah is a large and complicated field of
research. As far as the JPFs are concerned, there is very
little evidence to connect them with cult (see chap. VIII
above) - if by cult we mean special activities (e.g., giving
votive objects, burning incense, sacrificing animals,
praying) held in sacred buildings (shrines, temples, "high
places", etc.) with the help of special cultic furniture (altars,
incense stands, stone stele, etc.; for the anthropology of cult
see Morris 1987:235-263).
By "house cult", obviously none of the above is meant. It is
hard to imagine sacrifices made to the JPFs, or persons
kneeling before them and burning incense (the possibility
exists - cf. the story ofHerostratos in chap. IX.2.4 above, but
this is a rare exception and not a norm). What constitutes,
then, "house cult"? Is there any clear archaeological or
historical evidence for "house cult" in Iron Age II Judah?
The scholars who used the concept of "house cult" usually
pre-supposed that JPFs were cultic objects. If cultic objects
constantly appear in domestic contexts, then they imply a
"house cult". For example, Holladay (1987:276) claimed
that there is evidence for cult in almost half of the Tel Beit
Mirsim houses - but the evidence is the JPFs themselves.
Once cult is expanded in such a way, we face the risk of
seeing cult everywhere. Even if the figurines are religious
objects, it does not imply that they had a special cult. It
seems better to limit the term cult to the definition made
above (for popular religion and "house cult" see also
Ammerman 1991; Gerstenberger 1994 and chap. 11.4.10
above; for rituals in archeology see Barrett 1991).
X.7.2. The JPFs and Animal Figurines
Animal figurines in Iron Age II Judah are even more
common than the JPFs. Almost all scholars understood that
it would be ridiculous to see all the animal figurines as
representation of gods, or as attributive animals of gods. The
relation between these animal figurines and the JPFs is not
clear. The date, manufacture technique, decoration,
distribution and contexts are similar, but the animal
figurines seem to require a different explanation from that of
the JPFs (cf. Ucko 1968:418). The most common
explanation for animal figurines is magical figures (related
with "plenty"?). But it is also possible that the animal
figurines represented nothing more than the animals
themselves, while the JPFs represented a goddess. Perhaps
this goddess bestowed plenty onto the animal figurines that
stood in front of her. Most of the animal figurines from
Judah are domestic animals (mainly equids and cattle). It is
interesting that horned bulls do not appear among them.
Horned bulls are found as zoomorphic vessels, though.
Perhaps the horns were not an easy medium for clay
figurines. Perhaps the figurines portrayed young, horn-less
bulls (many animal figurines are so schematic, that it is
78
impossible to identify the exact species depicted). I mention
this because of the role of bulls and calves in Israelite
religion (Vernieylen 1990, with more references there), but I
am reluctant to make any further speculations.
X.7.3. The lack of Male Figurines
and the "Ban of Idols"
Is the lack of small male figurines from Judah related with
the Biblical "ban of idols"? If so, it implies that such
figurines represented gods. Indeed, Ahlstrom identified a
metal figurine from Hazor as representing Yahweh, but this
was sharply criticized by Hallo (1983:1-2). Many scholars
grasped the "ban of idols" as a late creation of the
Deuteronomistic school (chap. 11.4.5 above, n. 19; Dietrich
1994). It is worth remembering that female clay figurines
are dominant in the whole ancient Near East, while metal
figurines are usually male (Moorey and Fleming 1984; they
can be identified as gods only when they have divine
attributes, like crowns, ibid:78-80). Metal figurines were
common in the Late Bronze age and very rare in the Iron
Age II (Muhly 1980). Thus, Judah is not an exception, but
similar with other Near Eastern kingdoms. There was a
marked tendency to avoid iconic representations in Iron Age
II Judah, expressed in the Arad temple and the Hebrew seals
(only 4% of these seals carry anthropomorphic figures, and
only two seals have a clear figure of a goddess, Sass
1993:197, no. 136f; Uehlinger 1993:281-288). Compare the
different situation at the Edomite shrines of Qitmit and En
Hazevah (Beck 1993b; 1995; Cohen and YisraeI1995). An-
iconism is not unique to Judah, however (Oman 1993;
Mettinger 1994). The question of the "ban of idols" is a
complex one. For the present discussion, one must
remember that small clay figurines are not equal to large
cult statues, thus we should beware of jumping to
conclusions about a "ban of idols" if our data is derived from
small figurines.
The lack of small male figurines does not necessarily imply
that the female figurines belonged to women only. The
Biblical Asherah does not, since the kings of Judah
themselves introduced her to the Jerusalem temple.
Furthermore, we must be very careful not to project modern
gender conceptions on the past, regardless of their
importance and necessity today. If Judean women had no
"feminist consciousness", possibly they would not have felt
oppressed by the "official male religion", and would not turn
to "female domestic cult" (cf. chap. 1104.9 above).
X.7.4. The JPFs, Plaque Figurines
and Persian Period Figurines
Clay plaque figurines of naked women, holding their hands
on their chests, appear in Israel in the second millennium
BC much earlier than the JPFs (Albright 1939; Pritchard
1943: types I-III; Riis 1949; Tadmor, M. 1982; Ben-Arieh
1983; Conrad 1985; Beck 1986). These plaque figurines
continued into the Iron Age I period (Holland 1975: type C;
Tadmor 1982:17lf; here chapter III and app. 4.VIII-X, 5.Y).
The meaning of the plaque figurines is not clear. Tadmor
distinguished two groups within them (1982: 140-149, 156,
161-164). One group depicts standing women (goddesses?)
whose feet turn outwards, often holding attributes like lotus-
blossoms or snakes. Sometimes they stand on lions or
horses. The second group show women lying on a bed, that
has a ledge at her feet. Tadmor (1982:170f) related this
group with a burial cult, and noted similar figurines from
Egypt (Donatelli 1988:207; Pinch 1993; cf. also KamIah
1993; Musberg 1992).8 The Egyptian plaque figurines were
found in private houses, and were explained as amulets.
Similar figures appear on Egyptian wall paintings as
representations of mortal women whose function was to
ensure safe conception and birth (pinch 1983).
Plaque figurines appear also during the Iron Age II, but
rarely and mostly outside Judah. These are mostly figurines
of musicians (Beck 1991; add now plaque figurines from Tel
Halif and Dor). The transfer from plaque figurines to pillar
figurines is not clear, and there might have been a time gap
between the two forms (Tadmor 1982:172). Since the
meaning of the plaque figurines is not clear, they cannot
solve the question of the meaning of the JPFs.
The picture of Persian period figurines is completely
different from that of the Iron Age figurines. A new
technique appears - double moulded, hollow figurines.
Motifs are different; dressed women, women holding doves,
men holding their beards, etc. Even the distribution and the
contexts are different: in the Persian period we mainly find
favissae along the plains (e.g., Negbi 1966), and few
figurines from Judah. In between, the Babylonian period is
almost a tabula rasa. Stern claimed that the JPFs continued
into the Persian period (1973:167, 179 n. 48), but this is
unlikely, and the very few naked "eastern" female figurines
of the Persian period are different. He noticed the lack of
small clay figurines from Persian period Judah, and claimed
that it indicated the absolute acceptance of the "ban of
idols", while other neighbouring nations continued to use
figurines (Stern 1989:53f; cf. 1973:159, 181). This is a very
interesting observation, but we must be cautious because of
the time gap and the lack of direct continuity. Stern also
took it for granted that small figurines represented gods (he
defined figurines from Judah as "pagan", Stern 1989:53),
and may be compared with large cult statues without any
difficulty.
X.7.5. Figurines and Cult Statues
Some scholars adopted the view that the JPFs represented
the Biblical Asherah, and treated the two as equal. They
swapped without a second thought, from one to the other
and vice versa. In the Bible, the term Asherah probably
denotes a large cult object, a cult statue of the goddess
Asherah (Deut. 16:21, especially in relation to the Jerusalem
temple, II Kings 21:7; 23:6), and finally the goddess
8 A Syrian variant of plaque figurines was explained as a goddess
by Conrad (1985).
79
Asherah herself (in a few verses, e.g. I Kings 15:13; cf. also
chap. X.5 above).
The relations between the gods and their cult statues have
been discussed lately by many scholars (Hallo 1983;
Jacobsen 1987; for Greece cf. Gladigow 1985-6; Romano
1988; for Mesopotamia see Oppenheim 1964:183-198;
Dietrich and Loretz 1994:7-38; Matsushima 1993; for
Egypt, Ockinga 1984). Most of the large cult statues
disappeared, since they were made of wood and of precious
metals (for the burial of statues cf. Hallo 1983:15f;
Matsushima 1993:210, with more references). One source
from the reign of Nabfi-Apla-Iddina (the 9th century BC) is
enlightening. It tells how the Sutu destroyed the cult statue
of ~~ in Sippar, so that his cult could not continue as
usual. A symbol of a sun-wheel served as a temporal
substitute for the cult statue. Nabii-Apla-Iddina claimed that
the god decided to forgive his people and return. As a result,
a model of baked clay of the God was discovered, and
enabled the reproduction of a cult statue for Samas. The
exact nature of this model is not clear, though: is it a
figurine, a tablet of clay, or even a cylinder seal (thus Lee
1993)? In any case, this story shows that a small
representation or "likeness" of the god existed, and could be
used in times of necessity (cf. the story about Herostratos,
chap. IX.2A above).
The relation between small figurines and large cult statues is
not always simple. Alroth showed that the two are not
necessarily identical in shape, even when depicting the same
figure (Alroth 1989, based on material from Greek shrines
and temples). In Greek shrines, small figurines were often
dedicated in front of cult statues (ibid; also Romano 1988),
but the context of the JPFs are domestic. Curtis (1984)
believes that the Biblical "ban of idols" is very ancient, and
archaeology perhaps sustains this, in that large sculptures
are not found in Judah, unlike Ammon (stone sculptures),
Cyprus (clay statues, possibly of prayers: Connelly 1989);
Phoenicia (Eshmun temple at Sidon: Ganzman et. al. 1987)
and Edom (Qitmit and En-Hazevah: Beck 1995; Cohen and
YisraeI1995).
X.7.6. One Figure and One Function?
At the beginning of chapter X, I mentioned two basic
assumptions that need to be reviewed again. I believe that
all the JPFs represented the same figure, and not many,
different figures. This is based on the schematic rendering,
without any effort to individualize the figurines. The small
variants in the form of the JPFs have, according to this view,
only stylistic significance. The lack of groups of JPFs from
the same loci also strengthens this view, as each JPF was
meant to be used separately (chap. VIllA). Following this
reasoning, I believe that the JPFs had one meaning only,
and represented one figure. Theoretically, it is possible that
the same type of figurine would have more than one
meaning, but this is also a very easy way of escaping ~e
problem. When "the" meaning is not clear, an~ difficultIes
appear with every identification, it is convenient to take
every known meaning and apply it at will. But it is a
dangerous method.
If the JPFs portrayed the same figure, it is likely that they
had one basic function (whatever that may be). It is possible
to assume that one figure was used for more than one
function. The important question is the function of the
majority, and I believe that the majority of the JPFs had a
similar function. I have nothing against the possibility that
a few JPFs were used for various other functions.
x. 7.7. Summary
I have discussed the various explanations for the JPFs,
reviewing their advantages and disadvantages. It seems that
all the following explanations should be rejected: toys,
mortal figures, "mother goddess", "nurturing goddess",
"fertility goddess", "Syrian goddess", "naked goddess",
Anat, Astarte and a compositional "cosmic goddess" (Anat-
Astarte-Asherah-Kudshu, etc.).
Two explanations remain probable: magical figure and
Asherah (chap. X.4-5 above). It is necessary to stress
immediately, that these two explanations are not
contradictory, but complementary. In order to explain
this statement. a closer look at magic is needed.
Former studies of the JPFs that mentioned magic used, to a
large extent. a concept of magic based on the works of
Tylor, Frazer and their immediate followers. In this
conception, magic is at the opposite pole to religion. It deals
with natural forces, at the most demons and monsters
coercing them for immediate personal help (while religion
deals with supernatural gods, questions of moral and "high
theology"). Magic works by rituals, made by witches or
sorcerers (while religion involves cult. prayers, and official
priesthood). Magic has no logic (as opposed to science) and
is usually seen as primitive, if not totally negative.
As anthropologists and sociologists continued to search for a
definition of magic, it seems that the picture became more
and more problematic. Weber (1922, trans. 1965:28) gives
a definition of magic quite close to that of Frazer:
"The relationship of men to supernatural forces which take
the forms of prayer, sacrifice and worship may be termed
"cult" and "religion", as distinguished from "sorcery", which
is magical coercion. Correspondingly, those beings that are
worshipped and entreated religiously may be termed "gods",
in contrast to "demons", which are magically coerced and
charmed."
But Weber (ibid:ibid) knows that this separation is not
absolute, since: "the cults we have just called "religious"
practically everywhere contain numerous magical
components".,. Even the differentiation of priests and
sorcerers is problematic, since: "in many great religions,
including Christianity, the concept of the priest includes
such a magical qualification." Weber admitted that magic
is defined only from an outside point of view, but believed
80
that the western world of his time knew right from wrong
and could "designate the fallacious attributions of causality
as irrational, and the corresponding acts as 'magic'."
Malinowski (1925:88) follows Frazer. He defined magic as
"a practical art consisting of acts which are only means to a
definite end expected to follow later on"; while religion is
"a body of self-contained acts being themselves the
fulfillment of their purpose". To make it more simple, "the
belief in magic... is extremely simple. It is always the
affirmation of men's power to cause certain definite effects
by a definite spell and rite. In religion, on the other hand,
we have a whole supernatural world of faith: the pantheon
of spirits and demons, the benevolent power of totem,
guardian spirit, tribal all-father, the vision of future life"...
(Malinowski 1925:88). Magic is a specific art for specific
aims (ibid). A sense of irony is left when reading, in 1995,
what Malinowski wrote in 1922 (p. 89):
"Looking...from our high places of safety and developed
civilization, it is easy to see all the crudity and irrelevance of
Magic. But without its power and guidance, early men could
not have mastered his practical difficulties... nor could man
have advanced to the higher stages of culture."
Mauss (1972:18, origin 1950) is aware that certain societies
define other religion or former religion as magic, and there
is no ideal definition. He suggested a social definition of
magic (1922:24):
"A magical rite is any rite which does not playa part in
organized cults - it is private, secret. mysterious and
approaching the limit of a prohibited rite...we do not define
magic in terms of the structure of its rites, but by the
circumstances in which these rites occur".
However, Mauss does not really follow this definition, and
in the conclusion returns to a somewhat vague conception,
more in line with Frazer's: "while religion, because of its
intellectual character, has a tendency towards metaphysics,
magic - which we have shown to be more concerned with
the concrete - is concerned with understanding nature".
Skorupski (1976) discussed these studies (and others, e.g.
Durkheim's), aware that "the 'opposition' between the two
'institutions' of magic and religion does not exists as a
general fact" (1976:127). There is a severe problem in the
demarcation of magic from religion, if it is possible at all.
Skorupski (1976:154) considered tlie problem so acute, that
"it is a mistake to think that a theory of magic, or of
religion, must begin with a definition of what magic or
religion is". Also, "we must not expect a neatly exhaustive
distinction...between the religious and the magical"
(ibid: 155). The problem of defining magic is clear to
Skorupski, but the problem with Skorupski is that he does
not offer a solution to this problem, though obviously
believing that there is one. His conclusion is reminiscent of
the words of Weber:
has reached (independently) similar conclusions about magic in a
"What is for us in the end most striking about magical
practices is that they require assumptions which in one way
or another run counter to the categorical framework within
which we (at least officially) interpret the world" (Skorupski
1976:159).
The few quotes above are enough to show that there is no
accepted definition of magic, and it cannot be separated
exactly from religion. The polarization between the two and
the negative attitude towards magic are mainly a legacy of
the late Judaism and Christianity. Magic is not defined by
values, but sociologically: what "we" do is religion, what
"they" do is magic. As Ritner puts it: "Magic here is simply
the religious practices of one group viewed with disdain by
another", or in other words, "Your religion is my Magic"
(Ritner 1992:190; cf. Versnel1991; Voigt 1983).
Magic and religion are problematic categories of definition
in the ancient Near East as well (Ritner 1992; 1993:4:ff). In
ancient Egypt. magic was legal and could be desirable; it
was practiced in official temples by high-ranking priests,
and had no connotation of immorality. Much the same is
true for Mesopotamia (Ritner 1992; 1993; Wiggermann
1992).9 Therefore, the JPFs can represent Asherah, without
negating magical aspects or the relation to magical rituals (I
am using magic here in Ritner's sense of the term, of
course). On the other hand, explaining the JPFs as purely
magical figures is not satisfactory, since it relates only to
their function, not to their meaning. In order to keep a
purely magical explanation, one would have to assume that
there was a very common magical figure in Judah (the large
quantity of JPFs), that was not mentioned in the OT, and is
not one of the known goddesses. This is possible, but quite
perplexing - in view of the finding of many JPFs in varied
contexts of Judean society.
It seems therefore that the JPFs are indeed a representation
of the Biblical Asherah: this is the simplest and most logical
explanation. This view is hardly new, but many former
scholars adopted it for quite incorrect arguments (chap. II
above). The JPFs are not exactly identical with the Biblical
Asherah (which is usually a large cult statue or cult object,
related to the goddess Asherah). They are small figurines,
without special, sacred status and probably not connected
with public temples. The sacredness of an object stands in
relation to its function (that is, status), its value ("price"),
and its form (size). The large cult statue of the Asherah was
sacred because it was made of expensive materials, situated
in a public temple and represented the goddess in front of all
the population - but especially the higher classes (priests,
kings, etc.). On the other hand, the JPFs were cheap,
everyday objects, representing the goddess in private houses,
in front of ordinary people (chiefly, though not only).
9 During my stay in Oxford I had the pleasure of hearing a lecture
by M. Cunningham, a Ph.D scholar at Cambridge University. He
study of Mesopotamian incantations from the third and second
millenniums BC.
81
The JPFs are not evidence of "popular religion", if by this
we mean the opposite to an "official Yahwistic religion".
The Asherah was part of the Yahwistic religion, though she
was probably not as important as he was. The function of the
Asherah figurines was possibly as a protecting figure in
domestic houses, more likely a figure which bestowed
"plenty", especially in the domain of female lives (but not
necessarily used by women only). These figurines have
nothing to do with "black magic" and were not a forbidden
cult. at least for most of the time and for most of the
population. It seems that they were not broken deliberately.
Other than being a symbol for the goddess and what she can
bestow, I doubt if these figurines were object of cult
practices. At the most, one can imagine that they were
addressed in prayers or wishes, perhaps during times of
pressure and need.
It is interesting that Judean seals of the same period portray
no comparable female figure (Sass 1993, except in very few
cases). If the JPFs represented Asherah, why is she not
represented on the seals? The seals reflected higher levels
of society, but Asherah was probably venerated by them as
well. Most of the seals belonged to men and carry Yahwistic
names, thus maybe explaining their an-iconism. Also,
Asherah was probably much lower in status than Yahweh.
But it is better not to speculate further.
It is important to stress that the identification of the JPFs
with Asherah seems very probable, but is not proven and
should not be taken for granted. This identification is based
on the Biblical sources (together with the Kh. el-Kom and
Kuntillet 'Ajrud inscriptions) or, to be more correct, on a
certain interpretation of these sources (e.g., in rejecting the
"Asherim" of the Chronicler). It would be unwise to tum
the wheel the full way round, and simplistically draw
conclusions from the JPFs about the Biblical Asherah.
The present study of the JPFs does not solve all the
problems, but is perhaps part of a new phase of research,
with its many, as yet unanswered, questions.
Addenda
The following works appeared (or became available) after the completion
of this book, and could not be integrated: 1. The second part of a third
volume on Cypriot figurines (small figurines of the 7th-6th centuries) by
V. Karageorghis, 1995. 2. A publication of the pottery vessels from
Jerusalem cave I, by Eshel, in: Jerusalem IV (1995). Eshel dates the
cave to the 7th century BC, following his pottery chronology (but cf.
chap. 1.4. above). 3. A new work on the Asherah by C. Frevel (1995?),
which I have not yet studied.
 Figures 1 - 40 Fig. 2: The Quantitative Factor in JPFs' Studies

Name and year Type of Total PF I JPF- JPF-my Notes

Fig. 1: Attributes ofthe Use and Disposal of Figurines (after Voigt 1983)1 publication human author's definition
figurines definition
Function Attributes
Clermont Ganneau paper 1 1 1 one JPF, from a museum's
1 Due to cautious use there would be minor (or no) damage. Ritual touching (e.g., during
Cult Figure festivities) may cause areas of polish or abraison at heads and legs. Possible damage by 1886 collection
"killing" during disposal. May be found in special (ritual) places, or in inaccessible places Gezer II 1912 report ? ? 7 exact nos. not given
(caves, bodies of water). Assemblages of different figurines, deposed of in the same place, are
Pilz 1924 123 12 7 all JPFs from Gezer
possible. Unlikely to be associated with ordinary refuse.
TBMIII 1943 report ? 38 37 +unoublished fragments
2 Either no wear, or burnished by touching (e.g., while used as an amulet). Often, exhibits Pritchard 1943 monozraoh 249 52 14
Vehicle of signs of burning or mutilation on purpose as part of the disposal process. This can be seen by
Tel Nasbeh 1947 reoort 148 (60) 148 detailed registration
Magic fresh breaks in a consistent location (e.g., necks or waists). Disposal patterns in caves,
beneath house-floors, in pits, fires and in bodies of water . Usually, figurine fragments are Lachish 1953 report 12? 24
separated at the time of disposal, thus mending will not be possible. Groups of figurines are
SamariaI,I1I report 37 2? both JPFs in doubt
possible, since rituals may be repeated at the same place, or several figurines may be used in
one ritual. Association with domestic refuse is possible. Gibeon WS 1961 report 54 26 onlv 27 have photos

Holland 1975 Ph.D. 958 573 359 958 = his A+B+C types
3 Possibly minor damage to surfaces during handling, especially at base. Burning is possible, as
Engle 1979 Ph.D. 187 147 145 "classical" JPF
Initiation is the finding of whole figurines. Often, the figurines are disposed of in inaccessible places
Figure like caves and bodies of water. Rarely found in domestic contexts. Groups of figurines are Jeremias 1992 Dauer ca. 35 20 20? JPFs from robbery
possible, since initiation groups may be disposed of as one unit. Sometimes, association with Present study Ph.D. 1852 854 854
ordinary, domestic refuse.
Notes: Often, exact numbers are not available. The numbers in the column "total figurines" do not include
periods later than the Iron Age, nor animal figurines. The column "my definition" includes figurines which
4 Damage to surfaces, which are chipped and abraded, especially at base of standing figurines.
appear in the present catalogue (app. 1-2 below). For Tel en-Nasbeh, 60 indicates the number of figurines
Toy Applied parts broken away. Broken areas are worn by continual use. No systematic
with photographs or drawings in the report. For the works of Holland and Engle cf. also keys 5-6. The
mutilation, but damage in points of structural weakness. Disposal in ordinary domestic
number 854 (present study) does not include JPFs from unknown origins (app. 3 below). The definition
assemblages, inside and also outside houses. Random distribution in fills and debris, not in
"JPF" (column "PF/JPFs author's definition") was used since the thesis of Engle (1979).
groups. Association with domestic refuse, including bones, broken vessels, etc.

1General note: I have given relatively few drawings offigurines (figs. 4-11). I have no right to use drawings
from some of the new excavations, such as the City of David, Jerusalem. I am preparing publications of
figurines from other excavations, which will hopefully be published soon, thus I preferred not to use drawings
from these excavations (e.g., Lachish and Tel Beer Sheba). The JPFs are quite stereotyped, and a few
drawings suffice for a general impression. Finally, it helps to keep this book within reasonable limits.

82 83
 Fig. 3: Typology of Other Figurines Fig. 3 (continuation)

Type Whole Fragments Body Total Type Whole Fragments Body Total
Solid Hollow Solid Hollow
4.1. woman nlavinz a drum; hollow, wheel-made bodv 2 6 8 8 5.N.5 various hand-made fizurines 8 33 16 1 41
4.11. moulded heads 26 26 5.1V.6 hollow body Parts (of figurines types 5.m-5.IV) 23 23 23
4.m. solid and hollow nillar bodies 17 12 5 17 5.IV.7 solid body Parts (of figurines types 5.m-5.1V) 28 28 28
4.1V male figurines 2 5 2 1 7 5.IV.8 miscellaneous fragments 11 11 11
4.V. hand-made fizurines (whole or heads) 2 13 15 Total appendix 5.1V 25 124 72 29 149
4.VI. hand-made bodvDarts (not pillar bodies) 15 15 15
4.VII. olaoue figurines 5 6? 5 11
4.vm. nlacue figurines of nreznant women 2 14 8 16 5.V.l female plaque fizurines holdinz a disk (drum) 22 20 42 42
4.x1. unique plaque figurines 1 3 4 5.V.2 plaque figurines with "Hathor" hairdress 28 5 33 33
4.X. lea frazments of plaque fizurines 12 12 5.V.3 plaque figurines with "feathers" and "Hathor" dress 5 2 7 7
4.XI. addenda (miscellaneous) 8 8 5.VA plaque figurines with "crescent" hairdress 14 8 22 22
Total appendix 4 14 125 41 14 139 5.V5 plaque figurines with "feather hats", no background 1 3 4 4
5.V6 nlacue fizurines with "ureus svmbol", no backzround 1 6 7 7
5.V7 plaque figurines with uniaue features. 17 21 20 38
5.1.1 fizurines with moulded face, hollow bodies (Be) 2 2 2 5.V.8 body fragments with clav backzround 31 31 31
5.1.2 hollow bodY Parts 8 8 8 5.V.9 plaque figurines of nreanant women, high moulding 9 12 21 21
5.1.3 female drum players (solid, pillar body) 3 7? 7 10 (7?) 5.VI0 miscellaneous body frazments 29 29 29
5.1.4 miscellaneous heads 24 4 24 5.V.ll miscellaneous leg fragments 10 10 10
5.1.5 miscellaneous bodvDarts 24 24 24 Total appendix 5.V 97 147 226 244
5.1.6 miscellaneous fragments (not classified). 9 9
Total appendix 5.1 5 72 35 10 77
5.VI.1 Dea Tyria (pregnant, sittinz women) 10 6 2 14 16
5.VI.2 women plaving drums and related types 12 3 13 15
5.11.1 lamp-figurines with pillar bodies 2 2 1 1 4 5.VI.3 fizurines portravinz daily life scenes 3 3 3
5.11.2 bird fizurines with pillar bases 6 28 b=25 34 5.VI.4 other, fairly whole fizurines 2 2 2 2 4
5.11.3 male figurines 5 5 5.VI.5 various heads (1-14, 36-38) and body Parts 42 42
Total appendix 5.11 8 35 1 1 43 5.VI.6 various fizurines of unknown orizin 7 7
Total anoendix 5.VI.l 27 60 8 18? 87

5.m.l coastal plain - schematic heads with pendants 1 5 1 6

5.m.2 coastal plain - finely moulded heads, pendant 1 11 1 12 5.VII. 1-2 Persian period and fizurrines of other materials (29)
5.m.3 coastal nlain - moulded heads, double combed locks 1 8 1 9 5.VIII moulds (21)
5.111.4 coastal plain - moulded heads, uncombed locks 4 4
5.111.5 coastal plain- crescent moulded heads 4 1 4 Grand Total 181 862
5.m.6 drum nlavinz pillar figurines, hollow bodies 1 6 2 7
5.m.7 northern Israel- various moulded heads 41 1 41 Notes: Whole - including "nearly whole". The type - names are often presented in a short form. Types 5.VII-VIII
5.m.8 coastal plain - various moulded heads 1 39 3 40 are not included in the grand total (with 50 specimens, thus altogether 912). 12 figurines, types 5.1.1 and 5.1.3 were
Total appendix 5.111 5 118 10 123 included in appendix 2, thus the total number of other figurines in appendixes 4-5 (or in fig. 3), is 900.

5.IV.l Fairly whole hand-made figurines with pillar bodies 7 1 31 s: 5 8 Table 3b: The Relation between the Typologies of Holland and Engle
5.IV2 nea fizurines 6 4 10 10
5.IV.3 "Ashdodite" hand-made heads 3 18 3 21 Type Total Holland Holland Holland Holland Holland Holland Holland Holland Holland
5.IVA "Ashdoda" figurines 1 6 1 7 Engle No. All Am AIV A.V AVI A VII A VIII AIX AXIl
I 39 7 23 1 2
Notes: Whole - including "nearly whole". b = number of clearly classified pillar bases (type 5.11.2). See II 7 4 1
continuation on the next page. The type-names are often presented in a short form. m 15 4 5 3
IV 9 4 2 1
V 21 12 1 6 1 1
! VI
VII
7
42
1
15
2
3
4
4
5 2 2 5 3
!

84 85
 Fig. 4: Typology - Whole JPF Fig. 5: Typology - Hand-made JPF Heads

1. Figurine no. 254 [AI] 2. Figurine no. 252 [A1.h] 3. Figurine no. 332 [A2]

1. Figurine no. 9 [type A] 2. Figurine no.36 [type B]

4. Figurine no. 71 [A3]

5. Figurine no. 52 [A4]

3. Figurine no. 360 [body C.1.d]

6. Figurine no. 140 [A4] 7. Figurine no. 367 [A.S]

Notes: the numbers refer to Appendix 2. No. 140 is drawen from the original figurines, now in the Rockefeller Museum.
4. Figurine no. 118 [A+.1.d] 5. Figurine no. 78 [type Be]

Notes: the numbers refer to App. 1-2. Sizes of figurines are listed in App.1.

86 87
 Fig. 6: Typology - Moulded JPF Heads Fig. 7: Coastal and Northern Moulded Types - Appendix 5.111
1. No. 19, type B.3-4, Beth Shemesh 2. No. 245, type B.3.B, Tel 'Ira 1. 5.III.l.l, Kh. Hoga 2. 5.III.2.2 Mefalsim 3. 5.III.2.8 Tel Shera

4. 5.III.2.9Tel Shera 5. 5.III.3.1 Kh. Hoga 6. 5.III.4.1 Tel Kinnerot

3. No. 375, type B.3.C, Jerusalem 4. No. 72, type B.3(?), Jericho

7. 5.III.5.3 Tel Gemmeh 8. 5.III.6.1 Megiddo 9. 5III.7.5 Dan

5. No. 258, type B.6.C, Tel Beer Sheba 6. No. 209, type B.2.G, Tel Beit Mirsim

Notes: the numbers refer to Appendix 2.

Notes: the numbers refer to appendix 5.

88 89
 Fig. 8: Appendix 5.11 and Hand-made Coastal! Northern Types Fig. 9: Phoenician Figurines - Appendix 5.VI

1. Achzib 5.VI.1.1 2. Achzib 5.VI.2.3a 3. Shiqrnona 5.VI.2.7

. ,.,
Q.
:;~

.
. ..::E,-
~

1. 5.11.1.4 T. B. Mirsirn 2.5.11.2.15 Lachish 3.5.11.3.1 Beer Sheba (suq) 4. 5.1V.1.2 Tel Gemmeh

4. Achzib 5.VI.3.3 5. Gile'am 5.VI.5.3

6. 5.1V.3.5 Ashdod 8. 5.IV.3.9 Ashdod

5. 5.1V.3.21 Maresha 6. Megiddo 5.VI.5.10 7. Shiqrnona 5.VI.5.11 8. Shiqrnona 5VI.5.17

~'
(---(
i
,F"l'I
. ~ It \i '.

7. 5.1V.3.6 Ashdod 9. 5.1V.4.1 Ashdod

Notes: the numbers refer to appendix 5
Notes: the numbers refer to appendix 5.

90 91
 . .an Figurines
Fig. 10: Transjordani . - Appendix 4 .
FIg. 11'. Plaque Figurines - Appendix S.V.

1. Nebo 4.1.1 2. Nebo 4.1.2 3. Kh. el-Medeineh 411.4 4. Sahab 4.11.9

1. Nebo 5.VI.2 2. Gezer 5.VI.7

I yeh 411.18
5. Tell es-Sa "di . 6. Tell Deir 'AlIa 4.111.6 7. Beth Saida 4.1V2

:i
8. Buseirah 4.Vl 9. Buseirah 4.V2 . ah 4.VIII. 1
10. Buseir

4. Gezer 5. TBM 6. Ta'anakh

;
(~~""'
'.
..
. . 1.
5.V.3.4 5.V4.1
1.
5.V5.4

'\ ~.,
.
"~\'.
.-""" -'- \\
\ ..-r ---'-".J
~~~.

Notes: the numbers refer to appendix 4. 8. Ta 'anakh 5.V6.7 9. Tel Zeror 5.V7.17

92
93
 Fig. 15: Distribution of 854 JPFs (sites and main sub-types)
Fig. 12: The Dating ofthe JPFs
USite I Type ee Ac A+ A all Be B+ B all Cl C2 C3 all Total
UDate / Typeee Ac A+ A all Bc B+ B allD CI C2 C3 all Total A B C
Abu Gosh 1 1 1
(hundreds BC) A C
Bethel 1 4 4
10 or earlier I 1 1 1 2 3 Bethlehem 1 1 1
Gibeon 2 10 12 7 7 3 5 8 27
9-7? ,9-8?, 9? 3 3 1 1 4 Jericho 1 1 3 3 4
8? 1 3 5 9 3 7 10 6 5 1 14 33 Jerusalem 1 3 98 103 1 1 44 46 23 83 118 257 405
Kh. 'Anim I 1 1
8-7? 4 4 2 1 2 5 1 3 2 6 15
Kh. e-Ras 1 1 1
7? 7 1 8 16 5 13 18 1 1 2 36 Kh. Geresh 2 1 3 3
Kh. Rabud (Debir) 1 1 1
general 10 10 1 5 15
Moza 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 6
Total in doubt 8 4 17 29 10 1 35 46 9 10 3 28 103 RamatRahel 1 1 3 5 2 2 1 3 4 11
Ramot (el-Burg) 1 1 2 2 4 6 10 13
9-8 1 1 1 Tel el-Ful 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 4
8 2 4 6 2 2 27 31 12 14 6 33 70 Tel en-Nasbeh 2 1 31 34 28 28 35 30 16 81 143
Vered Jericho 1 1 2 3
8-7 2 12 14 1 13 14 6 9 8 24 52
Total Judean Mt. 5 8 146 159 3 1 90 94 62 132 143 375 628
7 7 7 9 9 1 3 4 20 Arad I? 8 9 4 4 2 7 1 10 23
Aroer 3 3 3
Total secure 2 2 23 27 3 2 49 54 18 25 17 62 143
Beer Sheba -SUQ 3 3 1 1 4
Persian? 2 2 2 Malhata 2 2 1 1 2 4
Tel Beer Sheba 1 1 6 8 1 12 13 3 9 10 22 43
Grand Total 10 6 40 56 13 3 87 103 28 35 21 92 251 Tel Ira 5 1 2 7
5 1
Notes: "?" indicates date in doubt. The first row, "10 or earlier," is not included in row "total in doubt". TelMasos 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 5
Total Negev area 1 2 16 19 1 30 31 6 18 15 39 89
Azeka 4 4 4
Fig. 13: Amended Dating of the JPFs Beth Shemesh 2 2 1 5 4 1 14 19 5 6 30
Gezer 1 1 2 1 3 4 1 1 7
UDate / Typeee Ac A+ A aliA Bc B+ B allD Cl C2 C3 allC Total Kh.Hoga 1 1 1
(hundreds BC) Lachish 3 2 5 5 1 15 21 1 2 3 29
Maresha 1 1 1
8 (with 9) 4 3 9 16 8 3 52 63 18 19 8 48 127 Tel Beit Mirsim 1 1 2 2 2 13 17 7 9 1 18 37
Tel el-Areini (Brani) 1 1 6 6 1 1 8
7 8 8 10 10 1 2 3 6 24
Tel ej-Judeidah 4 4 1 1 5
Total 4 7 17 24 8 3 62 73 19 21 11 54 151 Tel el-Muleiha 1 1 1
Notes to figs. 12-13: The dates are given in hundreds of years BC. "7" means the whole seventh Tel es-Safi (Gat) 1 1 1
Tel Halif (Lahav) 2 2 2
century BC and the early sixth (until 586 BC). The row "general" in fig 12 includes mixed loci, or
Total Shephelah 8 4 6 18 12 4 62 78 14 10 4 30 126
general dating to the Iron Age II (partly in doubt). Fig. 13 includes JPFs without archaeological Ashdod 1 1 1
contexts, from one-period sites; hence the difference in numbers in comparison with fig. 12. Tel Michal 1 1 1
Tel Qasilah I 1 1 I 2
Total Coastal Plain 2 2 1 1 1 I 4
Megiddo 1 1 1
Fig. 14: The Danger of Circular Arguments
Samaria I 1 2 2
Shechem 2 2 2
I. if a certain type of artifact is found in Judah ~ 2. then it is a "Judean artifact"
Tel eI-'Oremeh 1 1 1 1 2
3. and since it is a "Judean artifact" ~ 4. its distribution relates to Judah's borders Total North 1 3 4 1 2 3 7
Total all areas 14 14 170 198 17 5 186 208 83 163 162 448 854

Notes: The KetefHinom figurines are included within Jerusalem (for convenience sake). Body parts nos.
787-789 are included as type C3 in the table. Fragments nos. 807-834, which can be only classified as
"other C fragments", are included in column "all C".

94 95
 Fig. 16: Distribution Map Fig. 17: Distribution Graph ofthe JPF

R.K. Samaria 2 t Megiddo o

M

Shechem 2
Tel 'Oreimeh 2
Tel Farah 2
r-tr.I
]
",i
... Cl)

Tel Michal -co

~
T. Beer Sheba 43

Tel Qasileh 2

Tel Nasbeh 143

. . .Joshua
. . . . 15 border
.. .... (16.7%)
Bethel 4

,;';'" - - - ~e~n-:NaSbeh 143 Jericho 4

, / "
Gezer7 / Gibeon 27. f~A " Ramat Rahel 11
/ \& ~
/ ~e Vered Jericho 3 ~ Jerusalem 405
/ Abu Ghosh. Ramot 13 ~ (47.5%)

Ekron.
/ Moza' 6 Jerusalem 405 -
w

/ e. Ramat Rahel 11. Kh. e- Ras

I 8h eth
Tel Safi. / ~ el11esh 30.' Beth Lehem
/ ~ elra4 '
1../
Tel Erani 8"
/ .-"
.~-
Tel Goded 5
/ ~i Maresha
/
/ Lachish 29
I
( Fig. 18: Site Hierarchy (Main Sites and Sub-types)
I
I Tel Muleiha Tel Beit Kh. Geresh 3

I Mirsim 37 Kh. Rabud

~
90
81
I 80
DB
DC
I Tel Halif 2 '
Kh. 'Anim 70
I
60
/
I Arad 23
50

I 40
I
Tel Ira 7 30
Tel Beer Sheba 43

Beer S~eba suq 4. 'Tel Masos 5 Malhata 4 20

10
\
-, Aroer3'

-- -
0
.......
---- ....... _- -- --
..""
BeitMirsim Beth
Shemesh
Lachish BeerSheba Arad Gibeon Jerusalem Tel Nasbeh

Legend and Notes: -- Judah's border, following Na'aman

1989. The numbers indicate the
number of JPF found at each site (when only one JPF was found, the number is omitted). Arrows Note: the figurines in the addenda (nos. 588-854) are not included here (unlike figs.
point in direction of sites outside the map's limits. 15-17 above).

97
96
 Fig. 19: Size of Sites, Extent of Excavations and Amount of JPFs
Region /Site Size Excavated Total JPF per 1 Notes
(dunams) area JPF dunam
1 Gibeon 40-501 27 all JPF from the pool
1 Jerusalem 300-500 301 165 5.5 capital, including burials
1 Ramat Rabel 20 (outer) 2-3 11 3.7-5.5 royal palace?
1 Ramot 5 0.5-1 13 13-26 villa~e
1 Tel en-Nasbeh 32 20 143 7.1 fortified city
2Arad 2.5 2 23 11.5 Iron A~e fort only
2 Tel Beer Sheba 10 4-5 43 8.6-10.7 fortified city
2 Tel Ira 25 3 7 2.3 fortified city
2 TelMasos 40 2 5 2.5 city
3 Azeka 3 1.5 4 2.7 Iron A~e fort only
3 Beth Shemesh 38 15? 30 2 fortified city, burials
3 Gezer 108 50? 7 0.14 fortified city, burials
3 Lachish 60-70 15-20 29 1.4-1.9 fortified city, burials
3 Tel Beit Mirsim 30 8 37 4.6 fortified city, burials
3 Tel Erani 15 1.5 8 5.3 upper city only
3 Tel ei-Judeideh 25 0.9 5 5.5 city

Notes: The regions are: 1. Judean Mountains 2. Negev 3. Shephelah. The extent of the excavations is,
in many cases, a crude estimation and not exact figures. Numbers are "rounded" for convenience sake.
The excavated areas in Jerusalem are perhaps estimated too low, but on the other hand the new JPFs from
the city of David are not included here.

Fig. 20: Size of Figurines and Heads (mm.)

Type=> Aewhole Be whole A, A+, Ae B,B+,Be Bodies Cl
UData 12 specimens 13 specimens 104 specimens 150 specimens 45 specimens
(without Be)
Average 129 (without 162 26 28.3 90.8
no. 287)
Maximwn 160 = no. 125 210 = no. 198 53 = no. 369 41 144 = no. 306
46 = no. 140
Minimum 68? = no. 287 138 =no.l 14 = nos. 327, 19 = no. 60 53 = no. 468
98 = no. 80 348 45 = no. 468

<

Notes: the "nos." in the table refer to app. 2. The number of specimens indicates figurines which
could be measured (actually, or from drawings and photographs).

o
1'\

Striped ceramics - head with painted decoration. Plain ceramic - head without decoration (the examples are taken from the
white-washed parts only). Analyses by I. Segal, Israel Antiquities Authority.

98 99
 Fig. 22: Production of a Series of Figurines (after Nicholls 1952)
Fig. 24: Example of a "Series", Type B.3.b
Archetype (''patrix")
Heightnun. 33 32 32 31 31 30 29 28 26 25 21 21
U
Horizontal Variations ::Moulds: First Generation => Horizontal Variations Figurinenos. 84 83 142 145 112 146 141 307 16 58 86 120

u u u (app, 1-2),

Figurines: First Generation Figurines: First Generation Figurines: First Generation Sites L IN IN R IN IN J AS Gi L RR
u u u u u u u u u Notes: AS=Beth Shemesh; Gi=Gibeon; J=Jerusalem; L=Lachish; TN=Tel en-Nasbeh;
Derivative Generations, both of figurines and moulds (+more horizontal variations) R=Ramot; RR= Ramat Rabel. From 17 B.3.b heads, only 12 could be measured.

Fig. 23: Classification of the Moulded Heads

Fig. 25: Main Points of Breakage
Type Jerus. Ramat Gib. TN Lach. TBM Tel Gezer AS BS Arad Ira other Total
Rabel Erani
BIa 1 1 8 OTHER HEAD DAMAGES _____
BIb 1 2
BIc 1 2 2 2 7 7 NOSE
BI-2a 1 2 1 1 2 7
B2a 1 3 1 4 1 1 1 1 13
B2b 1 1 1 3
B2c 2 2 1 5
B2e 1 1 1. NECK
B2g 1 1 2 4 IpPEG
B2-3a 1 3 1 1 1 7
B2-3d 1 1
B3a 2 2 2 4 3 1 1 2 17
B3b 3 2 2 1 1 3 1 3 16
B3c 2 1 1 4
B3d 1 1 2
B4a 1 1 1 1 5
B4b 4 4 3 2 1 4 1 19 4 BREASTS
B4c 1 1
B4d 1 1
B4e 1 1
all B5 1 1 1 1 4
B6c 1 1
B.O 2? 3
B.srt I? 2? 2 4? 5 PILLAR BODY
Total 27 2 7 28 21 17 6 4 19 12 4 5 31 183

Notes: the names of the sites are abbreviated: Gib. = Gibeon; Jerus. = Jerusalem; Lach. = Lachish; 1N = Tel
Nasbeh; TBM = Tel Beit Mirsim; AS = Beth Shemesh; BS = Tel Beer Sheba. The <lower row is not a I
f

mathematical sum of all the other rows, since it includes all the doubtful cases.
6 BASE

Fi .2: 198 (TBM III: 1. 31:6).

100 101
 Fig. 26: Breakage Patterns of the JPFs Fig. 28: A Group of Modern Figurines

Breakage=:> 1 Id lu Ip 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 comp, Total with

UTvnes breaks data
A 33 52 17 10 10 6 16 3 6 4 23 124
B 52 53 33 20 5 4 4 9 5 6 26 31 179
C 78 21 13 13 72 62 24 112 19 I? I? 124- 166
Total 163 126 67 38 87 76 34 137 27 13 31 178 469

Notes: comp = composite breaks.

Fig. 27: Breakage Patterns of Modern Clay Figurines

breakage code => 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 remain total

.(J. height & position whole falls

1-10 1.5m, horizontal, face up 4 6 5 4 1 I 1 2 10

11-20 1.5m, horizontal, face down 3 7 7 2 2 10

21-30 1.5m, vertical, head down 2 2 8 10

31-38 2m, horizontal, face down 1 4 4 1 4 8

39a-b accidentally while carrying 1 1 1 2

40-49 3m, cement floor 8+ 9 9 6 6 4 4 10

Total 17+ 29 28 13 7 5 5 16 50

Notes: the numbers of the right column refer to the experiments. Some of the figurines that were not damaged
were used for a second trial. Two figurines were damaged while carried in a car before the trials (no. 39a-b),
and not used any further.

102 103
Fig. 29: A Modern Figurine Fig. 30: Percent of Broken Figurines in Ancient Assemblages

Site Broken Whole % of whole Sources and notes

figurines figurines figurines
Ashdod (philistia) 63 1 ashdoda 1.6 Ashdod I, II-III, mainly Iron Af!,e.
Samaria (Israel) 31 0 0.0 Samaria III, only the Iron Af!.e
Keisan (phoenicia) 61 0 0.0 Keisan I, all levels and types
Transiordan 139 8 5.8 App.4.
Horse and riders 284 9 3.2 All the wholes are from zraves
Meziddo (Israael) 65 5- 4 plaq. 7.7 May 1935, females, pls, 32-33
Plaque figurines 244 30 12.3 APD. 5.V, without nearly whole
Notes: The horse and riders figurines were discussed in the Ph.D work (1995, Hebrew). The whole
Transjordanian figurines are: app. 4: nos. 1.1-2, IV. 1, V.l, V.8, VII.I-2, IX.4. plaq.= plaque figurines.
The column "whole figurines" does not include the "nearly whole" figurines (unlike fig. 3 above)

Fig. 31: The Archaeological Context ofthe JPFs

Subtypeee Ac A all Bc B all Cl C2 C3 all Total
JJ. Context A+ A B+ B C
cistern 2 4 6 6 6 1 1 2 4 16
pool, water system 12 12 8 8 3 4 7 27
pit, silo 1 1 2 7 9 2 4 6 16
cave, cave (?), tomb (?) 1 1 3 3 4 5 3 12 16
tomb 5 2 7 7 3 10 3 3 20
room in a house 1 10 11 1 23 24 5 7 4 16 51
court, court of a house 6 6 2 1 4 10
house 1 1 1 1 2
house or court, room or alley 2 2 3 3 1 2 7
house? room? 4 4 1 3 1 5 9
casemate (one case in doubt) 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 5
gate, court of a zate 1 1 1 1 2
storehouse 2 2 1 3 4 1 1 7
street, alley 2 2 4 4 2 2 8
open area inside a site 2 2 4 4 1 1 3 9
outside city walls 2 2 9 9 1 1 12
fills 3 2 2 6 8 11
surfaces and debris 2 2 10 10 1 4 6 18
miscellaneous 3 3 3 3 1 1 2 8
Total per subtvpe 9 49 58 11 98 109 28 42 13 88 255

Note: Miscellaneous contexts include court or alley; alley?; tower; on bedrock; foundation trench; debris
heaps.

104 105
 Fig. 32: The Context - Wider Generalizations Fi . 34: Beth Shemesh - Season 1933

~::-J f'B"n
Subtype::::> Ac A all Bc B all Cl C2 C3 all Total
UContext A+ A B+ B C
grave 5 2 7 6 3 9 3 3 19
cave, cave?, grave? 1 3 4 4 5 3 13 17 .\
domestic (dom) 9 9 3 30 33 6 10 10 28 70 "

~ tp/r
domestic? 2 10 12 11 11 6 8 4 19 42
sacred, sacred? 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 5 R
public
public?
Total per subtype 8
2
1
26
2
1
34 11
1 3
5
56
4
5
67
2
21
3
2
29
1
18
3
5
72
9
11
173
-
Fig. 33: A "Model" Judean City
s
o

~
i ! I I - ...

Notes: JPF body fragment. JPF A head. - JPF moulded B head.

or - whole JPF. * Horse and Rider.
The location of some figurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of
numbers and Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

106 107
 Fi .36: Tel en-Nasbeh Northern Part

18 I 12 z y x w I V T s R Q p N
0
...I
p J r
L.,
o.J
"

o c::::J
11

[ 'J
0 L _
-- - ----'\-._-~

13
N

F 21

23
.... ' '

NI-I---"'-
A 449
.4SZ

I i
,.
10 5 o 25

Notes: - JPF body fragment. ~ JPF A head. _ JPF mouldedB head. Notes: - JPF bodyfragment. ~ JPF A head. - JPF mouldedB head.
- ~ or - - whole JPF. * Horse and Rider. -~ or -- whole JPF. * Horse and Rider.
The location of some figurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of The locationof some figurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of
numbersand Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped). numbers and Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

108 109
 Fi . 37: Tel en-Nasbeh
AB I AC I AD I AE I AF I AG AK I AL 111 I 19 I 1.7 I I 17/ 115 I 11/

28 143.
o
- ....- - - 1 l z

"
B

" .>
--I~"'~~~
\ -....u..L ~............1 u
,/ / - - -.....l JW....ttLJ.
o
(
~ o
s
<, o 0 0

o
'/
/'
---e14S
o
, -,
,/
r

--
_~).

22 I _ .... --- GATE

Q \
.: M
I r
I \
\ \ K
'\
20 \ \
J \
j-..::;._ -> H
r...~~~~q
- - 'C

~
_ ...-

\ J F
) ,/

18 r\ /,
r-, /.
\"-'- - /
o
498'"

B
16

u
...............-.....,(IN'
s
14 iii
10 5 0

Notes: JPF bodyfragment. .. JPF A head. JPF moulded B head. Notes: JPFbodyfragment. .. JPF A head. JPF moulded B head.

... or wholeJPF. * Horseand Rider. .. or wholeJPF. * Horseand Rider.

The locationof some figurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of The location of somefigurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of
numbersand Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped). numbers and Roman numerals refer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

110 111
 Fi .39: Tel Beit Mirsim - South East uarter Fi .40: Tel Beit Mirsim - North West uarter

'N

I
'I

t.+----
1
I
I .... --
r -

o
o

,~

I
22 I

i
I
I
I

21 123
t ....__._..

I
i

12

11 12

Notes: JPF bodyfragment. .l JPF A head. - JPF moulded B head. Notes: JPFbodyfragment. .l JPF A head. - JPF moulded B head.

.l or - wholeJPF. * Horse and Rider. ..l or - whole JPF. * Horse and Rider.
The location of somefigurines is approximated. The numbers referto the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of The location of somefigurines is approximated. The numbers refer to the JPF numbers (app. 1-2). Combinations of
numbers and Romannumeralsrefer to app. 4-5 (not all are mapped). numbers and Romannumerals referto app. 4-5 (not all are mapped).

112 113
 Abbreviations Bibliography
AASOR- Annual of the American Schools of Oriental JBL- Journal of Biblical Literature A-Campo, A. L. 1994. Anthropomorphic Representations Ahlstrom, G. W. 1993. The History of Palestine from the
Research JCS- Journal of Cuneiform Studies in Prehistoric Cyprus. A Formal and Symbolic Paleolithic Period to Alexander's Conquest. JSOT
ABSA- Annual of the British School at Athens JJS- Journal of Jewish Studies Analysis of Figurines c. 3500-1800 B.C. Jonsered. Supplement Series 146. Sheffield.
ADAJ- Annual of the Department of Antiquities of JNES- Journal of Near Eastern Studies P. Astroms. Albertz,R. 1978. Personliche Friimigkeit und ofjizielle
Jordan JNSL- Journal of Northwest Semitic Literature Abel, F. M. 1921. D~couverte d' un tombeau antique a Abou Religion. Sttutgart. Calwer Verlag.
AID- Archiv fUr Orientforschung JQR- Jewish Quarterly Review GhOch. RB 30: 98-102. Albright, W. F. 1939. Astarte Plaques and Figurines from
AJA- American Journal of Archaeology JSOT- Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Abusch, T. 1987-90. MaqlG. RLA VII: 346-351. Tel Beit - Mirsim. Melanges Syriens ofJerts a
AJBI- Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute JSS- Journal of Semitic Studies Ackerman, Susan 1992. Under every Green Tree. Popular monsieur Ren~ Daussaud. Paris. Librarie Geutbner:
AOS- American Oriental Society JSSEA- Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Religion in Sixth - Century Judah. Atlanta 107-120.
AS- Anatolian Studies Antiquities (Harvard Semitic Monographs 46). Scholars Press. Albright, W. F. 1942. Archaeology and the Religion of
AUSS- Andrews University Seminary Studies Ackerman, Susan and Braunstein, S. L. 1982. Israel in Israel. Baltimore. Jhon Hopkins Press
LA- Liber Anuus Antiquity. From David to Herod. The Jewish Alroth, Brita 1988. The positioning of Greek Votive
BA- Biblical Archaeologist Museum, New York. NY. Figurines. in: Hagg, R, Marinatos, N. and
BAR- British Archaeological Report. Oxford. Tempus OIP- Oriental Institute Publications Aharoni, y. 1956. Excavations at Ramat Rabel 1954. lEI Nordquist, G. C. eds. Early Greek Cult Practices.
Reparatum. OR- Orientalia 6: 137-157. Stockholm. P. Alstrdms Verlag: 195-203.
BARev- Biblical Archaeologist Review Or.An.- Oriens Antiquus Aharoni, y. 1958. The Northern Boundary of Judah. PEQ: Alroth, Brita 1989. Greek Gods and Figurines. Aspects of
BASOR- Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental OTL- Old Testament Library 27-31. Antropomorphic Dedications. Uppsala. Almquist
Research OTS- Old Testament Studies Aharoni, y. 1959. Zephat ofThutmose. lEI 9/2:110-122. and Wiksell.
BIFAO- Bulletin de l'Institute Francais d'Archeologie Aharoni, Y. 1962, 1964, See: RR I, RR II. Alt, A. 1925. The Settlement of the Israelite Tribes in
Orientale PEF(QS)- Palestine Exploration Fund (Quarterly Statement) Aharoni, Y. 1971. The Beer Sheba Excavations. The Palestine. in: Wilson, RA. (trans.) 1966. Essays on
Bi. Or. - Bibliotheca Orientalis PEFA- Palestine Exploration Fund, Annual of Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University Old Testament History and Religion. Oxford.
BN- Biblische Notizen PEQ- Palestine Exploration Quarterly (without page numbers). JSOT Press: 135-169.
PJB- Palastina Jahrbuch Aharoni, Y. 1971b. Roads and Sites. Tel Aviv. (Hebrew). Alt, A. 1925b. Juda Gaue unter Josia. PJB 21: 100-117.
CdE- Chronique d'Egypt Aharoni, Y. 1973. (00.). Excavations and Studies in Honor Alt, A. 1930. Nachwort iiber die Territorialgeschichte
QDAP- Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of of Professor Sh. Yeivin. Tel Aviv. The Institute of Bedeutung von Sanheribs Eingriff in Palastina.
EAEID.- Encyclopedia of Archaelogical Excavations in the Palestine Archaeology (Hebrew). PJB 25: 80-88. Reprinted in: Kleine Schriften zur
Holy Land, 2 Vols., 1970 (Hebrew; translated into Aharoni, y. 1973, 1975 , see: BS 1, Lachish V. Geschichte des Volkes Israel II: 242-249.
English and revised, 4 vols., 1975-1978). RA- Revue d'Assyriologie et d'Archeologie Orientale Aharoni, y. 1976. The Stratification of Judahite Sites in the Ammerman, Rebecca M. 1985. Medma and the Exchange of
EAEID.new- The New Encyclopedia of Archaelogical RB- Revue Biblique 8th and 7th Centuries B.C.E. BASOR 224:73-90. Votive Terracottas. in: Molene, Caroline and
Excavations in the Holy Land, 4 Vols. 1993 RDAC- Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus Aharoni, y. 1978. The Archaeology of the Land ofIsrael. Stoddart, S. eds. Papers in Italian Archaeology IV.
(Hebrew; English revised ed., 4 vols., 1994). RdE- Revue d'Egyptologie English Trans. by A. Rainey, 1982. Philadelphia. BAR International Series 246. Oxford: 5-19.
EI- Eretz Israel RLA- Reallexikon der Assyriologie (Berlin) Westminster Press. Ammerman, Rebecca M. 1991. The Naked Standing
Enc.Miqr.-Encyclopedia Miqrait. Hebrew. 8 Vols. (Biblical RSF- Rivista di Studi Fenici Aharoni, Y. 1981. Arad Inscriptions. Jerusalem (IES). Goddess: A Group of Archaic Terracotta Figurines
Encyclopedia). Aharoni, Y. 1987. The land of the Bible. A Historical from Paestum. AJA 95/2: 203-230.
Shnaton- Shnaton. An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Geography. 2nd ed., ed. by A. Rainey. London. Amiran, R 1956. Two Tombs in Jerusalem from the Period
GM- Gottinger Miszellen Near-Eastern Studies. Hebrew. Aharoni, Y. and Amiran, Ruth 1964. Arad: A Biblical City of the Kings of Judah. Bulletin of the Israel
SIHAJ- Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan in Southern Palestine. Archaeology 17/1: 43-53. Exploration Society XX/3-4:173-179 (Hebrew).
Had. Arch.- Hadashot Archaeologiot. IAA, Jerusalem (Vols. I-IV) Ahituv, Sh. 1994. The Missing District: A Study of the Amiran, R 1967. A Note on Figurines with "Disks". EI 8:
(Hebrew). SIMA- Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology Cities and Districts of Judah in Joshua 15:21-62. EI 99-100 (Hebrew).
HAR- Hebrew Annual Review 24: 7-11. Amiran, R and Eitan, A. 1970. Excavations in the
HTR- Harvard Theological Review TA- Tel Aviv Ahlstrom, G. W. 1963. Aspects of Syncretism in Israelite Courtyard of the Citadel, Jerusalem. IE! 20: 9-17.
HUCA- Hebrew Union College Annual Religion. Lund (Horae Soederblominae), Amr, A. 1. 1980. A Study of Clay Figurines and
UF- Ugarit Forschungen Ahlstrom, G. W. 1980. Is Tell ed-Duweir Ancient Lachish? Zoomorphic Vessels of Transjordan during the
IEJ- Israel Exploration Society PEQ: 7-9. Iron Age, with special Reference to their
1st. Mit- Istanbuler Mitteilungen VT- Vetus Testamentum Ahlstrom, G. W. 1982. Royal Administration and National Symbolism and Function. PhD Thesis, University
Religion in Ancient Palestine. Leiden. Brill. of London.
JANES- Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society ZA- Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, Ahlstrom, G. W. 1983. Tell ed-Duweir: Lachish or Libnah? Amr, A. J. 1988. Ten Human Clay Figurines from
JAOS- Journal of the American Oriental Society ZAW- Zeitscrhift fUr die Alttestamentliche PEQ 103f. Jerusalem. Levant 20: 185-196.
JARCE- Journal of the Archaeological Research Center in Wissenschaft Ahlstrom, G. W. 1984. An Archaeological Picture of Iron ANEP see: Pritchard, J.B. 1954.
Egypt ZDPV- Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina Vereins Age Religions in Ancient Palestine. Studia Arav, R 1992. Beit Saida. Notes and News. IE! 43:252-254.
Orientalia 55: 117-144. Arav, R 1994. Beit Saida. Had. Arch. 101-2:22 (Hebrew).
Ahlstrom, G. W. 1985. Tell ed-Duweir: Still a Problem. Ardener, Shirely. ed. 1993. Women and Space. Ground
BASOR 132: 46f. Rules and Social Maps. Oxford. Berg.
Ahlstrom, G. W. 1991. The Role of Archaeological and AS 1. Grant, E. 1931. Ain Shems Excavations 1. Haverford.
Literary Remains in reconstructing Israel's History. College Press.
in: Edelman, Diana. ed. The Fabric of History. AS 2. Grant, E. 1932. Ain Shems Excavations 1928-1931
JSOT Supplement Series 127. Sheffield: 116-141. Part 11. Haverford. College Press.

114 115
AS 3. Grant, E. 1934. Rumeilah, being Ain Shems
Excavations Part III. Haverford. College Press.
AS 4. Grant, E. 1938. Ain Shems Excavations Part IV.
Pottery. Haverford. College Press.
AS 5. Grant, E. and Wright, G. E. 1939. Ain Shems
Excavations Part V. Text. Haverford.
Ashdod I. Dothan, M. and Freedman, D.N. 1967. Ashdod I.
The First Season of Excavations 1962. Atiqot VII.
Ashdod II-III. Dothan, M. ed. 1971. Ashdod II-III. The
Second and Third Seasons of Excavations 1963,
1965. Atiqot IX-X.
Auerbach, Elise. 1992. Review of: Blocher, F. 1987. Unter-
suchungen zum Motiv der Nackten Frau in der alt-
babylonischenZeit. JNES 51/4: 308-310.
Avigad, N. 1960. Excavations at Machmish, 1958.
Prelimina:ry Report. lEI 10: 90-96.
Avigad, N. 1970. Excavation in the Jewish Quarter of the
Old City, Jerusalem, 1970. 0020:129-134.
Avigad, N. 1972. Excavations in the Jewish Quarter of the
Old City. Qadmoniot 19-20:91-100 (Hebrew).
Avigad, N. 1980. The Upper City ofJerusalem. Jerusalem.
Shiqmona.
Avigad, N. 1986. Hebrew Bullae from the Time ofJeremiah.
Jerusalem (Hebrew).
Ayalon, E. 1985. The Iron Age Pottery Assemblage from
Horvat Teiman (Kuntillet 'Ajrud). MA Thesis, Tel
Aviv University (Hebrew).
Badre, Leila 1980. Les figurines anthropomorphes en terre
a a
cuite ['age du Bronze Syrie. Paris. P. Geuthner.
Bahat, D. 1981. The Wall of Manasseh in Jerusalem. lEI
31: 235-2236.
Bailey, D.W. 1994. Reading Prehistoric Figurines as
Individuals. World Archaeology 25/3:321-333.
Bar-Adon, P. 1989. Excavations in the Judean Desert.
'Atiqot IX (Hebrew Series).
Barkay, G. 1985. Northern and Western Jerusalem in the
End of the Iron Age. Ph.D. Theis, Tel Aviv
University (Hebrew).
Barkay, G. 1989. The Priestly Benediction on the Ketef
Hinom Plaques. Cathedra 52/:37-76 (Hebrew).
Barkay, G. 1990. The Iron Age II-III. in: Ben-Tor, A. ed.
The Archaeology of Ancient Israel in the Biblical
Period. Tel Aviv. The Open University: 77-233
(Hebrew).
Barkay, G. 1993. The Redefining of Archaeological Periods:
does the Date 588/586 B.C.E. Indeed mark the End
of the Iron Age Culture? in: Biran, A. and Aviram,
J. eds. Biblical Archaeology Today 11. Jerusalem.
Keter: 106-109.
Barkay, G. 1994. Burial Caves and Burial Practices in Judah
in the Iron Age. in: Singer, I. ed. Graves and
Burial Practices in Israel in the Ancient Period.
Jerusalem: 96-164 (Hebrew).
Barnes, Ruth and Eicher, J.B. eds. 1992. Dress and Gender.
Making Meaning in Cultural Context. NY and
Oxford. Berg.
Barnett, R. D. 1968. Illustrations of Old Testament History.
London. The Trustees of the British Museum.
116
Barrelet, M. T. 1968. Figurines et reliefs en terre cuite de
la Mesopotamie antique. Vol. I. Paris. Institut
Francais d'Arch~ologie de Beyrouth LXXXV.
Bartlett, J. R. 1989. Edom and the Edomites. Sheffield.
JSOT Supplement Series 77.
Barrett, J.C. 1991. Towards an Archaeology of Ritual. in:
Garwood, P. et. al. eds. Sacred and Profane.
Proceedings of a Conference on Archaeology and
Ritual. Oxford University, Committee for
Archaeology Monographs 32.
Beck, Pirhiya 1982. The Drawings from Horvat Teiman
(Kuntillet 'Ajrud). TA 9:3-86.
Beck, Pirhiya. 1986. A New Type of Female Figurine. in:
Kelly - Buccellati, Marilyn ed. Insight through
Images. Studies in Honor of Edith Porada. Malibu.
Udenda Press: 29-34.
Beck, Pirhiya. 1991. A Figurine from Tel 'Ira. EI21:87-93
(Hebrew).
Beck, Pirhiya. 1993. Early Bronze Age "Bed Models" Re-
considered. TA 20/1: 33-40.
Beck, Pirhiya. 1993b. Transjordanian and Levantine
Elements in the Iconography of Qitmit. in: Biran,
A. and Aviram, J. eds. Biblical Archaeology
Today 11. Jerusalem. Keter: 231-236.
Beck, Pirhiya. 1995. Catalogue of Cult Objects and Study of
the Iconography. in: Beit- Arieh, I. ed. Horvat
Qitmit. An Edomite Shrine in the Biblical Negev.
Tel Aviv University:27-197.
Becking, B. 1992. The Fall ofSamaria. An Historical and
Archaeological Study. Leiden. Brill.
Beer, Cecilia. 1991. Eastern Influences and Styles? A
Reconsideration of some Terracottas of Cypriote
Manufacture. in: Vandenabeele, Frieda and
Laffineur, R. eds. Cypriote Terracottas. Brussels
and Liege. Vrije Universiteit: 77-85.
Begg, C.T. 1986. The Significance of Jehoiachin's Release:
a New Proposal. JSOT 36: 49-56.
Begg, C.T. 1987. The Death of Joshia in Chronicles:
Another View. fIT 37: 1-8.
Beit Arieh, I. 1985. Tel 'Ira - A Fortified City of the
Kingdom of Judah. Qadmoniot 69-70: 17-24
(Hebrew).
Beit Arieh, I. 1986. Horvat 'Uzza - A Border Fortress in the
Eastern Negev. Qadmoniot 73-74:31-40 (Hebrew).
Beit Arieh, I. 1987. Tel 'Ira and Horvat 'Uza: Negev Cities
in the Late Israelite Period. Cathedra 42: 34-38
(Hebrew).
Beit Arieh, I. 1987b. An Edomite Temple at Horvat Qitmit.
Qadmoniot 75-76:72-79 '(Hebrew).
Beit Arieh, I. 1989. An Edomite Shrine-at Horvat Qitmit. EI
20:134-146 (Hebrew. English Version 1991 in: TA
18/1:93-116).
Beit Arieh, I. 1992. Horvat Radum. EI23:106-12 (Hebrew).
Beit Arieh, I. 1995 (ed.). Horvat Qitmit. An Edomite Shrine
in the Biblical Negev. Tel Aviv University.
Beit Arieh, I. and Cresson, B. C. 1991. Horvat 'Uza. A
Fortified Outpost on the Eastern Negev Border. BA:
126-135.
Ben-Arieh, Sarah. 1983. A Pottery Mould for a Goddess
Figurine. Qadmoniot 64:123-124 (Hebrew).
Ben-Dov, M. 1982. The Dig at the Temple Mount. Keter.
Jerusalem. (Hebrew).
Bennett, C.M. 1966. Fouilles d'Umm el Biyara. RB 73: 372-
403.
Bennett, C.M. 1972. Chronique archeologiques, Buseirah.
RB 79/3: 426-430.
Bennett, C. M. 1973. Excavations at Buseirah, Southern
Jordan, 1971. Levant 5: 1-11.
Bennett, C.M. 1983. Excavations at Buseirah. in: Sawyer, 1.
F.A. et.al. eds. Midian, Moab and Edom. Sheffield.
JSOT Supplement Series 24:9-17.
Bennett, C.M. and Blakely, J.A. eds. 1989. Tell el- Hesi.
The Persian Period (Stratum V). Winona Lake.
Eisenbrauns.
Berlinerblau, J. 1993. The 'Popular Religion' Paradigm in
Old Testament Research. A Sociological Critique.
JSOT 60: 3-26.
Betlyon, J.W. 1985. The Cult of the Asherahl Elat at Sidon.
JNES 44: 53-56.
Best, 1. 1991. Linguistic Evidence for a Phoenician Pillar
Cult in Crete. JANES 20: 7-13.
Bhattacha:rya, D. K. 1989. Terracotta Worship in Fringe
Bengal. in: Hodder, I. ed. The Meaning of Things.
Material Culture and Symbolic Expression.
London. Unwin Hyman: 12-22.
Bienkowski, P. 1986. Jericho in the Late Bronze Age.
Warminster. Arris and Philips.
Bienkowski, P. 1991. Edom and the Edomites. Review
Article. PEQ: 139-142.
Bienkowski, P. 1991b. (ed.). The Art ofJordan. Treasures
from an Ancient Land. Gloucestershire. A. Sutton
and the National Museums and Galleries.
Biran, A. 1974. Tel Dan. BA 37/2:26-51.
Biran, A. 1985. Tel 'Ira. Qadmoniot69-70:25-28 (Hebrew).
Biran, A. 1987. Tel 'Ira and Aroer towards the End of the
Judean Monarchy. Cathedra 42: 26-33 (Hebrew).
Biran, A. 1992. Dan. 25 Years of Excavations at Tel Dan.
Tel Aviv. Hakibbutz Hameuchad (Hebrew).
Biran, A. and Cohen, R. 1975. Aroer. Notes and News. lEI
25: 171.
Biran, A. and Cohen, R. 1978. Aroer in the Negev.
Qadmoniot 41: 20-24 (Hebrew).
Biran, A. and Cohen, R. 1981. Aroer in the Negev. EI 15:
250-273 (Hebrew).
Bird, Phillis. 1987. The Place of Woman in the Israelite
Cultus. in: Miller, P. D., Hanson, P. D. and
McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient Israelite Religion.
Essays in Honor of F. M. Cross. Philadelphia.
Fortress Press: 407-419.
Bisi, Anna Maria. 1979. Les sources Syro - Palestiniennes et
Chypriotes de I'art Punique. Antiquites Africaines
14: 17-35.
Bisi, Anna Maria. 1989. Le rayonnement des terres cuites
chypriotes au Levant aux premiersiecles de rage
du Fer. in: Peltenburg,E. ed. Early Society in
Cyprus. Edinburgh: 256-265.
Bisi, Anna Maria. 1991. Heritages, emprunts et survivances
Chypriotes dans les terres cuites des colonies
phc!niciennes. in: Vandenabeele, Frieda and
Laffineur, R. eds. Cypriote Terracottas. Vrije
University: 87-92.
117
Black, J.and Green, A. 1992. Gods, Demons and Symbols
of Ancient Mesopotamia. An Illustrated
Dictiona:ry. London. The Trustees of the British
Museum.
Bliss, F. J. 1898. Excavations at Jerusalem. London. PEF.
Bliss, F. J. 1899. Second / Third Report on the Excavations
of Tell Zakariya. PEFQS: 89-111,170-187.
Bliss, F. J. and Macalister R. A. S. 1902. Excavations in
Palestine. London. PEF.
Bloch-Smith, Elizabeth M. 1992. The Cult of the Dead in
Judah: Interpreting the Material Remains. JBL 111/
2: 213-224.
Blocher, F. 1987. Untersuchungen zum Motiv der nackten
Frau in der atlbabylonischen Zeit. Munich. Profil
Verlag.
Bloom, Joanne B. 1988. Material Remains of the Neo-
Assyrian Presence in Palestine. PhD Dissertation,
Bryn Mawr College.
Boardman, J. 1980. The Greeks Overseas. London. 2nd
Edition. Thames and Hudson.
Boardman, J. 1988. Trade in Greek decorated Pottery.
Oxford Journal ofArchaeology 7:27-33,371-373.
Bohm, Stephanie. 1990. Die 'Nackte Gottin'. Zur
Ikonographie und Deutung unbekleideter
weiblischer Figuren in den fruhgriechischen Kunst.
Mainz. Von Zabem Verlag.
Bonano, A. ed. 1986. Archaeology and Fertility Cult in the
ancient Mediterranean. Papers presented at the
First Conference on Archaeology of the Ancient
Mediterranean, Malta 1985. Amsterdam. Gruner.
Borger, R. 1976. Tonmanchen und Puppen. Bi. Or. 30:
176-183.
Borowski, O. 1995. Hezekiah's Reforms and the Revolt
against Assyria. BA 58/3:148-155.
Bourke, S. 1992. Excavations in the Iron Age Extra - Mural
Quarter on the South - East Hill of Jerusalem:
Review Article. PEQ: 59-62.
Bowden, H. 1991. The Chronology of Greek Painted
Pottery: Some Observations. Hephaistos 10:49-59.
Brandes, M. 1980. Destruction et mutilation de statues en
Mesopotamie. Akkadica 16: 28-40.
Brandl, B. 1984. The engraved Tridacna Shell Discs. AS
24: 15-41.
Bretschneider,1. 1991. Gotter in Schreinen. Eine Unter-
suchung zu den syrischen und levantischen
Tempelmodeln, ihrer Bauplastik und ihren
Gotterbildern. UF23: 13-32.
Briend, J. 1992. Bible et Archeologie: dialogue entre deux
disciplines. Le Monde du Bible 75: 37-41.
Brinkman, J. A. 1984. Prelude to Empire. Babylonian
Society and Politics, 747 - 626 B.C. Philadelphia.
Babylonian Fund (Occasional Publications no. 7).
Bron, F. and Lemaire, A. 1983. Poids inscrits ph~nico
arameens du VIlle sickle avo J. C. in: Atti dell
congresso internazionale di study fenici e punici
vol. 3. Rome: 767-770.
Broshi, M. and Finkelstein, I. 1992. The Population of
Palestine in Iron Age II. BASOR 287: 47-60.
Brown, S. 1992. Perspectives on Phoenician Art. BA 55/1:
6-24.
 BS I. Aharoni, Y. ed. 1973. Beer Sheba 1. Tel- Aviv
University, The Institute of Archaeology.
BS n. Herzog, Z. ed. 1984. Beer Sheba II. The Early Iron
Age Settlements. Tel- Aviv University, The
Institute of Archaeology.
Bulbach, S. W. 1981. Judah in the Reign of Manasseh.
PhD Dissertation. New York University.
Burkert, W. 1992. The Orientalizing Revolution. Near
Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early
Archaic Age. Harvard University Press.
Burstein, S.M. 1984. Psamtek I and the End of Nubian
Domination in Egypt. JSSEA 14/2: 31-35.
Burrows, M. 1941. What mean these Stones? New Haven.
ASOR
Caquot, A 1994. Review of: Keel, O. and Uehlinger, C.
1992. GOttinen, Gotter und Gottessymbole. Bi. Or.
51/3-4: 378-382.
Carless-Hulin, Linda S. 1989. The diffusion of Religious
Symbols within Complex Societies. in: Hodder, I.
ed. The Meaning of Things. Material Culture and
Symbolic Behaviour. London. Unwin Hyman: 90-
95.
Carless-Hulin, Linda S. 1989b. The Identification of
Cypriote Cult Figures through Cross - Cultural
Comparison: Some Problems. in: Peltenburg, E. ed
Early Society in Cyprus. Edinburgh.
Edinburgh University.
Caubet, Annie. 1991. The Terracottas Workshops ofIdalion
during the cypro - archaic Period. Acta Cypria
1991/3. Jonsered. P. Astrdm (SIMA Pocket book
120): 128-149.
Caubet, Annie. 1992. Achna, 1882: R~flection sur les
dcouvertes du sanetuaire cypro - archaic et
classiques. in: loannides, G.C. ed. Studies in Honor
of Vassos Karageorghis. Nicosia. The Society of
Cypriot Studies: 261- 267.
Cazelles, H. 1983. 587 ou 586? in: Meyers, C. L. and
O'Connor, M. eds. The Word of the Lord shall go
Forth. Winona Lake. Eisenbrauns: 427-435.
Chadwick, J.R 1992. The Archaeology of Biblical Hebron
in the Bronze and Iron Ages. PhD Dissertation,
University of Utah.
Chambon, A 1984. Tell el-Far'ah I. L'Age du Fer. Paris. 1.
Gabalda.
Childs, B.S. 1967. Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis. Studies
in Biblical Theology 2. Great Britain. SCM.
Cholidis, Nadja. 1992. Moobel in Ton. Untersuchungen zur
archaologischen und religionsgeschichtlichen
Bedeutung der Terrakottamodelle von Tischen,
Stuhlen und Betten aus dem Alten Orient. Munster.
Ugarit Verlag.
Ciasca, Antonia. 1962. Tell Gat. Or. An. I: 23-39.
Ciasca, Antonia. 1963. Un Deposito di Statuette de Tell Gat.
Or. An. II: 45-63.
Ciasca, Antonia. 1964. Some Particular Aspects of the
Israelite Miniature Statuary at Ramat Rabel. in:
Aharoni, Y. ed. RR II: 95-100.
Clarke, D.L. 1968. Analytical Archaeology. Bristol. 2nd ed.
1978. Methuen.
118
Clements, RE. 1983. The Ishaiah Narrative of2 K. 20:12-
19 and the Deuteronomistic History. in: Zakovitch,
Y. and Rofe, A eds. I. L. Seeligmann Volume.
Jerusalem. Rubinstein: 209-220.
Clermont- Ganneau, Ch. 1884. Antiquities of Palestine in
London. PEFQS: 222-230.
Clermont- Ganneau, Ch. 1896. Archaeological Research in
Palestine Vol. I. Repr. 1971, English translation by
A Stewart. Jerusalem. Raritas.
Clermont- Ganneau, Ch. 1896. Archaeological Researches
in Palestine during the Years 1873-4, Vol II.
London. PEF.
Cohen, R 1979. Neo-Assyrian Elements in the first Speech
of the Biblical rab-Iaqe. Israel Oriental Studies 9:
32-47.
Cohen, Rudolph. 1983. Kadesh-Barnea. A Fortress from the
Time of the Judean Kingdom. The Israel Museum
Catalogue No. 233. Jerusalem. The Israel Museum.
Cohen, R. and Yisrael, Y. 1995. On the Road to Edom.
Discoveries from 'En Hazevah. Israel Museum
Catalogue no. 370. Jerusalem (Hebrew and
English).
Colbow, Gudrun. 1991. Die kriegrische Iitar. Miinchen.
Profil Verlag.
Collombier, AM. 1987. Ceramique Greque et echanges en
J Meditterranee Orientale. in: Cypre et la cote Syro-
Phenicienne. Studia Phoenicia 5: 239-248.
Connelly, J.B. 1989. Standing before one's God. Votive
Sculpture and the Cypriote Religious Tradition. BA
52/4: 210-218.
Conrad, D. 1985. A Note on an Astarte Plaque from Tel
Akko. Michmanim 2:19-24.
Contenau, G. 1914. La deesse nue babylonienne. Etude
d'iconographie comparee. Paris. P. Geuthner.
Coogan, M. D. 1987. Canaanite Origins and Lineage:
Reflections on the Religion of Ancient Israel. in:
Miller, P.D, Hanson, P.D. and McBride, S.D. eds.
Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor ofF.M.
Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 115-124.
Cook, R.M. 1992. The Wild Goat and Fikellura Styles:
Some Speculations. Oxford Journal ofArchaeology
11/3: 255-266.
Cooper,1.S. 1983. Reconstructing History from Ancient
Inscriptions: the Lagash - Umma Border Conflict.
Malibu. Udenda.
Courtois,1.S. 1984. Alashia III. Les objects des niveaux
stratifies d'Enkomi. Paris. Editions Recherche sur
les civilizations, Memoire no. 32.
Cross, F.M. 1971. The Old Phoenician Inscription from
Spain dedicated to Hurrian Astarte. HTR 64:189-
195.
Cross, F.M. and Milik, 1.T. 1956. Exploration in the Judean
Buqe'ah. BASOR 142: 5-17.
Crowfoot, 1. W. and Fitzgerald, G. M. 1929. Excavations in
the Tyropoeon Valley, Jerusalem, 1927. PEFA IV.
Culican, W. 1969. Dea Tyria Gravida. AJBI 1/2: 35-50
(repr. 1986 in: Opera Selecta. From Tyre to
Tartessos. Goterborg. P. Astrdms: 265-280).
Culican, W. 1973. The Graves at Tell er-Ruqeish. AJBI 2/2:
66-105.
Culican, W. 1975-6. Some Phoenician Masks and Other
Terracottas. Berytus 24: 47-87.
Culican, W. 1976. A Terracotta Shrine from Achzib. ZDPV
92: 47-53.
Curtis, E. L. and Madsen, A L. 1910. Critical and
Exegetical Commentary on the Books ofChronicles
(ICC). Edinburgh.
Curtis, E.M. 1984. Man as the Image of God in Genesis in
the Llght ofAncient Near Eastern Paralles. Ph.D.
Dissertation, the University of Pennsylvania.
Dagan, Y. 1992. The Shefelah during the Period of the
Monarchy in Light ofArchaeological Excavations
and Survey. M.A Thesis, Tel-Aviv University
(Hebrew).
Dajani, RW. 1966. Four Iron Age Tombs from Irbed. ADAJ
11: 88-106.
Dandamayev, M.A and Lukonin, V.G. 1989. The Culture
and Social Institutions of Ancient Iran.
Cambridge. Cambridge University.
Daviau, P.M. and Dion, P.E. 1994. El, the God of the
Ammonites? The Atef-Crowned Head from Tell
Jawa, Jordan. ZDPV 110/2: 158-167.
Davies, G. L. 1982. Tell ed- Duweir = Ancient Lachish: a
Response to G. W. Ahlstrom. PEQ: 25-28.
Davies, G. L. 1985. Tell ed- Duweir not Libnah but Lachish.
PEQ: 92-96.
Davila, 1. R and Zuckerman, B. 1993. The Throne of
'Ashtart Inscription. BASOR 289:67-80.
Day, 1. 1986. Asherah in the Hebrew Bible and North-
Western Semitic Literature. JBL 105/3: 385-408.
Day, 1. 1992. Asherah, Astarte. The Anchor Bible
Dictionary Vol. 1: 483-7,491-4.
Day, J. 1994. Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of
Canaan. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M.A
eds. Etn Gott allein? Freiburg (OBO 139).
Universitatsverlag: 181-196.
Day, Peggy L. 1989. Gender and Difference in Ancient
Israel. Minneapolis. Fortress Press.
Day, Peggy L. 1992. Anat: Ugarit's "Mistress of Animals".
JNES 51/3: 181-190.
De-Miroschedji, P. 1995. The Excavations at Tel Yarmuth.
Qadmoniot 109:27-35 (Hebrew).
De-Vaux, R 1951. La trosieme campaigne de fouilles a
Tell el- Far'ah, pres Naplous. RB 58:393-430.
De-Vaux, R 1952. La quartieme campaigne de fouilles a
Tell el- Far'ah, pr~s Naplous. RB 59:551-583.
De-Vaux, R 1957. Les fouilles de Tell el- Far'ah, pres
Nablouse. RB 64: 552-580.
De-Vaux, R 1958. Les institutions de l'Ancient Testament.
Paris. CERF. English trans. by 1. McHugh. 1961.
Ancient Israel, its Life and Institutions. London.
Dearman, 1. A 1992. Religion and Culture in Ancient
Israel. Peabody Museum. Hendrickson.
Deboys, D. G. 1990. The History and Theology in the
Chronicler's Portrayal of Abijah. Biblica 71: 48-62.
Deem, A 1978. The Goddess Anath and some Biblical
Hebrew Cruces. JSS 23/1: 25-30.
119
Delcor, M. 1974. Le Hieros Gamos d'Astarte. Rivista di
Studi Fenici II. Repr. 1976 in: Religion d'Israel et
Proche Orient Ancient. Leiden. Brill: 55-71.
Deutsch, R. 1988. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction
no. 50. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew).
Deutsch, R 1988b. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction
no. 45. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew).
Deutsch, R 1989. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction
no. 55. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew).
Deutsch, R 1989b. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction
no. 60. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew).
Deutsch, R. 1990. Ancient Coins and Antiquities. Auction
no. 65. Jaffa. Matza Co. (Hebrew).
Deutsch, R 1993. Ancient Coins and Archaeological
Antiquities. Auction no. 10, April 1993. Jaffa.
Dever, W. G. 1982. Recent Archaeological Confirmation to
the Cult of Asherah in Ancient Israel. Hebrew
Studies 23: 37-43.
Dever, W. G. 1983. Material Remains and the Cult in
Ancient Israel. An Essay in Archaeological
Systematics. in: Meyers, C. L. and O'Connor, M.
eds. The Word ofthe Lord shall go Forth. Essays
in Honor of D. N. Freedman. Winona Lake.
Eisenbrauns: 571-587.
Dever, W. G. 1984. Asherah, Consort of Jahweh? New
Evidence from Kuntillet 'Ajrud. BASOR 255:21-37.
Dever, W.G. 1987. The Contribution of Archaeology to the
Study of Canaanite and Early Israelite Religion.
in: Miller, P.D., Hanson, P.D. and McBride, S.D.
eds. Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of
F. M. Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 209-247.
Dever, W. G. 1990. Recent Archaeological Discoveries and
Biblical Research. Seattle and London. University
of Washington Press.
Dever, W.G. 1991. Archaeology, Material Culture and the
Early Monarchical Period in Israel. in: Edelman,
Diana. ed. The Fabric of History. JSOT
Supplement Series 127. Sheffield: 103-115.
Dever, W. G. 1994. Ancient Israelite Religion: how to
reconcile the differing Textual and Artifaetual
Portraits? in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A
eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg.
Universitatsverlag: 105-125.
Dever, W.G. et.al. eds. 1970, 1974, 1986. Gezer 1, Ill, IV.
HUCA Annual I, III, IV.
Diakonoff, I.M. 1983. Media. in: Gershevitz, I. ed. The
Cambridge Ancient History ofIran 2. Cambridge.
Cambridge University Press: 36-148.
Dicou, B. 1994. Edom, Israel's Brother and Antagonist.
Sheffield. JSOT Supplement Series 169.
Dietrich, W. 1992. Review of Cholidis, Nadja, "Mdbel in
Ton". UF 24:-499.
Dietrich, W. 1994. Der Eine Gott als Symbol politischen
Widerstands. Religion und Politik im Juda des 7
Jahrhunderts. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein,
M. A eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg.
Universititsverlag: 463-490.
Dietrich, M. and Loretz, O. 1992. "Jahwe und seine
Aschera". Anthropomorphes Kultbild in Mesopo-
tamien, Ugarit und Israel. Das biblische Bildverbot.
Miinster. Ugarit Verlag.
Dion, P. E. 1992. Les KTYM de Tel Arad: Grecs ou
Ph~niciens? RB 99/1: 70-97.
Dobbs - Allsop, F. W. 1994. The Genre of the Mesad
I;lashavyahu Ostracon. BASOR 295:49-55.
Doermann, R W. 1987. Archaeological and Biblical Intert-
pretation: Tell el-Hesi. in: Perdue, L.G., Toombs,
L. E. and Jhonson G.L.eds. Archaeological and
Biblical Interpretation. Essays in Memory ofD. G.
Rose. Atlanta. 1. Knox: 129-145.
Dohmen, C. 1985. Das Bildverbot, Seine Entstehung und
seine Entwicklung im Alten Testament (Bonner
Biblische Beitrage 62). Bonn. P. Hanstein Verlag.
Donatelli, Laura 1988. Small Objects in Funerary
Equipment. in: Egyptian Civilization. Religious
Beliefs. Egyptian Museum of Turin: 198-212.
Donner, H. 1986. Geschichte des Volkes Israel und seiner
Nachbiim in Grundzilgen II. GOttingen. Vanden-
hoeck & Ruprecht.
Dornemann, R H. 1983. The Archaeology of the
Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages.
Milwaukee. Milwaukee Public Museum.
Dothan, M. 1956. The excavationjs at Afula. Atiqot I [ES):
19-70.
Dothan, M. 1964. Ashdod. Preliminary Report of the
Excavations in Seasons 1962/1963. IE! 14: 79-95.
Dothan, M. 1967. Ashdod. A City of the Philistine
Pentapolis. Archaeology 20/3: 178-186.
Dothan, M. 1967, 1971. see: Ashdod I, Ashdod II-III.
Dothan, M. 1977. The Musicians of Ashdod. BA 40/1: 38-
39.
Dothan, Trude. 1982. The Philistines and their Material
Culture. Jemsalem. IES.
Dothan, T. and Gitin, S. 1987. The Rise and Fall of Ekron
of the Philistines. BA 50: 197-222.
Driver, S. R 1922. Modern Research as Illustrating the
Bible. The Schweich Lectures 1908. London,
Oxford University.
Duff, A. I., Clark. G. A. and Chadderdon, T. 1. 1992.
Symbolism in the Early Paleolithic: A Conceptual
Odyssey. Cambridge Archaelogical Journal 2/2:
211-229.
Duncan, 1. G. 1924. Fourth Quarterly Report on the
Excavation of the Eastern Hill of Jemsalem.
PEFQS: 163-180.
Duncan, 1. G. 1925. Fifth Quarterly Report on the
Excavation of the Eastern Hill of Jemsalem.
PEFQS: 8-24.
Duncan, 1. G. 1931. Digging up Biblical History. London.
Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
Edelstein, G. 1973. Kh. el- Burg. Had. Arch. 46: 26
(Hebrew).
Edelstein, G. The Weaver's Quarters at Tel Amal in the
Period of the United Monarchy. Museum of
Mediterranean Archaeology (Hebrew, Year of
Publication not marked).
Edelstein, G. and Levy, S. 1972. Cinq ann~es de fouilles a
Tel'Amal (Nir David). RB 79:325-367.
Edwards, O. 1992. The Year of Jerusalem's Destruction. 2
Addaru 597 B.C. Reinterpreted. ZAW 104:101-106.
120
Eitam, D. 1990. Royal Industry in Ancient Israel during the
Iron Age Period. in: Aerts, E. and Klengel, H. eds.
The Town as Regional Economic Centre in the
Ancient Near East. Leuven University Press: 56-73.
Eitan, A. 1984. (Interview). BARev 12/4: 30-34.
Eitan, A. 1994. Rare Sword of the Israelite Period found at
Vered Jericho. Israel Museum Journal XII: 61-62.
Elat, M. 1975. The political Status of the Kingdoms of
Judah and Isreal within the Assyrian Empire in the
7th Century B.C. in: Lachish V: 61-70.
Elat, M. 1977. Economical Relations in the Lands of the
Bible e. 1000 - 539 Be. Jerusalem (Hebrew).
Elat, M. 1990. International Commerce in Palestine under
Assyrian Rule. in: Kedar, B.Z., Dothan, T. and
Safrai, S. eds. Commerce in Palestine Throughout
the Ages. Jerusalem: 67-88 (Hebrew).
Elgavish,1. 1967. Shiqmona. Haifa. The City Museum of
Ancient Art (without page numbers).
Eigavish, 1. 1994. Shiqmona. On the Seacoast of Mount
Carmel. Tel Aviv (Hebrew).
Elitzur, y. 1994. Rumah in Judah. IE! 44/1-2: 123-128.
Emerton, 1.A. 1982. New Light on Israelite Religion: The
Implications of the Inscriptions from Kuntillet
'Ajrud. ZDPV 92:2-20.
Engle, 1. R 1979. Pillar Figurines of Iron Age Israel and
Asherah/Asherim. Ph.D Thesis. Pittsburgh
University.
Eph'al, I. 1984. The Assyrian Ramp at Lachish: Military
and Lexical Aspects. Zion XLIX: 333-347
(Hebrew).
Eshel, H. 1987. The Late Iron Age Cemetry of Gibeon. IE!
37: 1-16.
Eshel, H. 1989. A lmlk Stamp from Beth-EI. IE! 39: 60-62.
Eshel, I. 1986. The Chronology of Selected Late Iron Age
Pottery Groupsjrom Judah. Ph.D Thesis, Tel Aviv
University (Hebrew).
Fantar, M.H. 1973. A propos d'Astart en Mediterranee
Occidentale. RSF 1: 19-29.
Fargo, V.M. 1987. Hesi in the Iron Age II Period: A Judean
Border Fortres. in: Perdue, L.G., Toombs, L.E. and
Johnson, G. L. eds. Archaeological and Biblical
Interpretation. Essays in Memory of D. G. Rose.
Atlanta.J. Knox: 157-164.
Ferron, 1. 1969. Le statuettes au tympanon des hypogees
Puniques. Antiquitls Africaines III: 11-33.
Finkelstein, I. 1993. Environmental Archaeology and Social
History: Demographic and Economic Aspects of the
Monarchic Period. in: Biran, A. and Aviram, 1.
eds. Biblical Archaeology Today II. Jemsalem.
Keter: 56-66.
Fitzgerald, G. M. 1930. The four Canaanite Temples of
Beth Shean II. University of Pennsylvania.
Fowler, M. D. 1985. Excavated Figurines: A Case for
Identifying a Site as Sacred? ZA W 97:333-344.
Frame, G. 1992. Babylonia 689 - 627 B.C. A Political
History. Istanbul. Netherlands Historisch-
Archaeologisch Institut te Istanbul.
Franken, H. 1. 1960. The Excavtions at Deir 'AlIa in Jordan.
VT 10: 386-393.
Franken, H. 1. 1989. Human Clay Figurines from Jerusalem
-a Note. Levant 21: 197.
Franken, H. 1. 1995. Cave 1 at Jerusalem- an Interpretation.
in: Bourke, S. and Descoeudres, 1. P. eels. Trade.
Contact and the Movement of People in the
Eastern Mediterranean. Sydney. (Studies in
Honour of 1.B. Hennessy). University of Sydney.
Franken, H.1. and Franken-Battershill, C.A. 1963. A Primer
of Old Testament Archaeology. Leiden. Brill.
Franken, H.1. and Ibrahim, M.M. 1978. Two Seasons of
Excavations at Tell deir 'AlIa. ADAJ 22: 57-80.
Frazer, 1. 1890. The Golden Bough. London (abridged from
the third ed. of 1913, rep. 1990).
Frettldh, Magdalene L. 1994. Brauchen oder gebrauchen wir
die Gdttin? in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M.
A. eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg.
Universitatsverlag: 391-399.
Fritz, V. 1990. Kinneret. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen auf
dem Tell el- 'Oreme am See Gennaseret, 1982-
1985. Wiesbaden. O. Harrassowitz.
Fritz, V. 1993. Kinneret. Excavations at Tell EI- 'Oreimeh
(Tel Kinrot) 1982-1985 Seasons. TA 20/2: 187-215.
Fritz, V. 1994. An Introduction to Biblical Archaeology.
Sheffield. JSOT Supplement Series 172.
Frost, S. B. 1968. The Death of Joshia. A Conspiracy of
Silence. JBL 87: 369-382.
Frymer-Kensky, Tikva. 1992. In the Wake ofthe Goddesses.
Women, Culture and the Biblical Transformation
of Pagan Myth. NY. F. Columbine.
Gadon, Elinor 1989. The Once and Future Goddess.
Wellingborough. Aquarian Press.
Galil, G. 1987. The Administrative Division of the
Kingdom of Judah in the light of the Epigraphical
Data. Zion 52/4: 495-509 (Hebrew).
Galil, G. 1988. The Administrative Division of the Shefelah.
Zion 53/1: 1-12 (Hebrew).
Galil, G. 1991. A New Look at the Chronology of the Last
Kings of Judah. Zion 56/1: 1-19 (Hebrew).
Galil, G. 1992. Geba' Ephraim and the Northern Boundary
of Judah in the Days of Joshia. Tarbiz LXIII: 1-
14 (Hebrew).
Galil, G. 1992b. Judah and Assyria in the Sargonic Period.
Zion 57/2:111-133 (Hebrew).
Galil, G. 1995. A New Look at the "Azekah Inscription",
RB: 321-329.
Galling, K. ed. 1937. Biblisches Reallexikon. Tiibingen. 1.
C. Mohr (2nd ed. 1977).
Gamer-Wallen, I. 1992. Drei Votivfiguren vom Gebel el-
Zeit am Roten Meer. in: Gamer-Wallert, I. and
Helck, W. eds. Festschrift fur Emma Brunner-
Traut. Tiibingen. Attempo Verlag: 83-93.
Ganzman, et. al. 1987. Das Eschmunheiligtum von Sidon.
Die Funde der tiirkischen Ausgrabungen von
1901 bis 1903 im Archaologischen Museum in
Istanbul. 1st. Mit. 37: 81-130.
Garbini, G. 1964. Campagne di Scavi dell' Universita di
Roma in Israele. Or. An. III: 134-139.
Garfinkel, Y. 1984. The Distribution of the Identical Seal
lmpressions and Settlement Pattern in Judah before
121
Sennacherib's Campaign. Cathedra 32: 35-53
(Hebrew).
Garfinkel, Y. 1985. A Hierarchic Pattern of the Private Seal-
Impressions on the "LMLK" Jar Handles. EI 18:
108-115 (Hebrew).
Garfinkel, y. 1987. The City-List, Epigraphic Evidence and
the Administrative Division in the Kingdom of
Judah. Zion 52/4: 489-494 (Hebrew).
Garfinkel, Y. 1988. 2 Chr. 11:5-10 Fortified Cities List and
the Imlk Stamps - Reply to N. Naaman. BASOR
271: 69-73.
Garstang,1. 1934. Jericho - City and Necropolis. Fourth
Report. Annals ofArchaeology and Anthropology,
the Institute ofArchaeology, Liverpool University
21: 99-136.
Garwood, P. et. al. 1991. Sacred and Profane. Procceedings
of a Conference on Archaeology, Ritual and
Religion, Oxford 1989. Oxford University,
Committee of Archaeology Monographs No. 32.
Gates, C. 1992. Art for Children in Mycenaean Greece. in:
Laffineur, R. and Crouwley J.L. eds. eikslon.
Aegean Bronze Age Iconography. Aegeum 8.
Universite de Li~ge: 161-171.
Geller, M.1. 1989. A New Piece of Witchcraft. in: Behrens,
H., Loding, D. and Roth, M.1. eds. DUMU-E-;;
DUB- BA- A. Studies in Honor of1. W. Sjoberg.
Philadelphia. The University Museum: 193-203.
George, A. R 1993. Review of Farber, W., 1989. "Schlaf,
Kindchen, Schlaf!" Mesopotamische Baby-
Beschworungen und Rituale. Winona Lake. JNES
52: 298-300.
Gerstenberger, E.S. 1994. Weibliche spiritualitiit in Psalmen
und Hauskult. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein,
M. A. eds. Ein Gott alJein? (OBO 139). Freiburg.
Universifatsverlag: 349-363.
Gesell, Geraldine C. 1985. Town, Palace and House Cult in
Minoan Crete. SIMA 67. Gdteborg.
Gezer I - III. Macalister, R. A. S. 1912. The Excavation of
Gezer Vols. I-III. London. J. Murray
Gibeon WS. Pritchard, 1. B. 1961. The Water System of
Gibeon. Pennsylvania. University Museum.
Gibson, Sh. 1994. The Tell ej-Judeideh (T. Goded)
Excavations: A Re-appraisal based on archiv
Records in the PEF. TA 21/2: 194-234.
Gilbert-Peretz, Diana. 1989. The Assemblage of Figurine
from the City of David. The 15th Archaeological
Congress, Jerusalem. Abstracts of Lectures: 21-22
(Hebrew).
Gilbert-Peretz, Diana. In Press. City of David Figurines.
Qedem.
Gilula, M. 1978. 'To Yahweh Shomron and His Asherah'.
Shnaton 111:129-137 (Hebrew)
Ginsberg, H.L. 1950. Judah and the Transjordan States from
734 to 582 BCE. in: A. Marx Jubilee Vol. The
Jewish Theological Seminary of America: 347-368.
Gitin, S. 1989. Tel Miqne - Ekron: a Type Site for the inner
Coastal Plain in the Iron Age 2 Period. in: Gitin,
S. and Dever, W. G. eds. Recent Excavations in
Israel: Studies in Iron Age Archaeology. AASOR
49: 23-58.
Gitin, S. 1990. Ekron of the Philistines Part 2: Olive Oil
Supplies to the World. BARev 16/2: 32-43.
Gitin, S. 1993. Seventh Century BCE Cultic Elements at
Ekron. in: Biran, A and Aviram, 1. 005. Biblical
Archaeology Today II. Jerusalem. Keter: 248-258.
Gitin, S. 1995. Tel Miqne-Ekron in the 7th Century B.C.E:
The Import of Economic Innovation and Foreign
Cultural Influences on a Neo Assyrian Vassal City
State. in: Recent Excavations in Israel. A View to
the West. Dubuque, Iowa: 57-79.
Gitin, S. and Dothan, Trude. 1987. The Rise and Fall of
Ekron of the Philistines. BA: 197-222.
Giveon, R 1967. Three Fragments of Statuary from the
Northern Sharon. Bulletin of the Israel
Exploration Society XXXI: 118-123 (Hebrew).
Giveon, S. 1994. Tel Harasim. Periliminary Reoprt ill. Tel
Aviv (Hebrew).
Gladigow, B. 1985-6. Prasenz der Bilder - Prasenz der
Gotter. in: Kippenberg, H. E. et. also eds. Visible
Religion IV-V: 114-133.
Glueck, N. 1933. Further Explorations in Eastern
Palestine. BASOR 51:9-19.
Glueck, N. 1934. Explorations in Eastern Palestine I.
AASOR 14: 1-114.
Glueck, N. 1945. The Other Side of the Jordan. New
York. ASOR.
Goldberg, Naomi R 1979. Changing ofthe Gods. Feminism
and the End of Traditional Religions. Boston.
Beach Press.
Gophna, R 1970. Some Iron Age II Sites in
Southern Philistia. 'Atiqot VI: 25-30 (Hebrew).
Haag, E. ed. 1985. Gott, der Einzige. Zur entstehung des
Gophna, R 1981. The Boundary between the
Kingdoms of Judah, Ashkelon and Gaza in the
Hackett,1. A 1987. Women's Studies and the Hebrew Bible.
Light of an Archaeological Surrey in the Shiqma
Valley. Proceedings of the Seventh World
Congress ofJewish Studies Vol. 1. Jerusalem: 49-
52 (Hebrew).
Hadley, Judith M. 1987. The K.hirbet el- K6m Inscription.
Gonen, R 1979. Grain. Dagon Collection. Haifa. Shiqmona.
GOrg, M. 1993. Die "Astarte des Kleinviehs". BN 69: 9-11.
Hadley, J. M. 1993. Kuntilet 'Ajrud: Religious Center or
Goring, Elisabeth. 1991. Pottery Figurines: The
Development of a coroplastic Art in Chalcolithic
Hadley, 1. M. 1994. Yahweh and "his Asherah:"
Cyprus. BASOR 282-3:153-161.
Goring, Elisabeth. 1992. Secondary Treatment of Prehistoric
Figurines: An Example from Chalcolithic Cyprus.
in: Ioannides, G.C. ed. Studies in Honor ofVassos
Karageorghis. Nicosia. The Society of Cypriote
Hadzisteliou-Price, Theodora. 1978. Kourotrophos. Cults
Studies: 37- 40.
Grant, E. 1929. Beth Shemesh. Haverford. Biblical and
Kindred Studies.
Hagg, R ed. 1981. Official and Popular Cults in Mycenaean
Gray,1. 1964. I and II Kings. A Commentary. London.
Green, A 1983. Neo Assyrian Apotropaic Figures. Iraq 45:
87-96.
Green, A 1985. A Note on the "Scorpion-Man" and Pazuzu.
Iraq 47: 75-82
Haiman, M. 1994. The Iron Age II Sites of the Western
Green, A 1988. The Iconography of Meslamtaea. RA 82:
173-175.
Hallo, W.W. 1983. Cult Statue and Divine Image. A Pre-
Green, A 1994. Mischwesen. RLA VIII/3-4: 222-264.
Green, AR 1982. The Fate of King Yehoiakim. AUSS
20/2: 103-109.
Green, AR 1993. The Identity of King So of Egypt - An
Alternative Interpretation. JNES 52/3: 99-108.
122
Green, S. W. and Perlman, S. M. eds. 1985. The Archaeo-
logy of Frontiers and Boundaries. Orlando.
Academic Press.
Grimal, N. C. 1985. Les "noyes" de Balat. Melanges offerts
a Jean Vercoutter. Paris. Editions recherche sur
les Civilisations: 111-121.
Grohman, E.D. 1962. Moab. in: Buttrick, G.A et. al. eds.
IDB Vol. ill: 418.
Gubel, E. 1982. Notes sur un fragment de statuette
Phenicienne de la region d'Amurm. in:
Arcldologie au Levant. Recueil ~ la memoire de
Roger Saidah. Lyon. Maison de l'Orient: 225-231.
Gubel, E. 1986. Coroplastie. in: De Coessen, C. ed. Les
Pheniciens et Ie Monde Mediterranean.
Luxemburg. Banque Generale du Luxemburg: 112-
123.
Gubel, E. 1991. From Amathus to Zarephtah and Back
Again. in: Vandenabeele, Frieda and Laffineur, R
eds. Cypriote Terracottas. Brussels - Liege. Vrije
Universiteit: 131-138.
Gudison, Lucy. 1989. Death, Woman and the Sun.
Symbolism of Regeneration in Early Aegean
Religion. University of London.
Gunneweg, 1., Perlman, I. and Meshel, Z. 1985. The Origin
of the Pottery of Kuntillet 'Ajrud. IE! 35: 270-283.
Gurney, O. R 1960. A Tablet of Incantations against
Slander. Iraq 22: 221-227.
Guy, P.L.O. 1938. Megiddo Tombs. Chicago (OIP 33).
Chicago University Press.
Monotheismus in Israel. Freiburg. Herder Verlag.
in: Friedman, R E. and Williamson, H. G. M. eds.
The Future of Biblical Studies. The Hebrew
Scriptures. Atlanta. Scholars Press: 141-164.
VT 37: 50-62.
Desert Way Station? PEQ 125: 115-124.
Archaeological and Textual Evidence for the Cult
of the Goddess. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein,
M. A eds. Ein Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg.
Universitiltsverlaag: 235-268.
and Representation of the Greek Nursing Deities.
Leiden. Brill.
Greece. in: Hagg, R andMarinatos, N. eds.
Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age.
Stockholm. Svenska Institut i Athens and P.
Alstroms: 35-40.
Negev Highlands. IE! 44: 36-61.
liminary Study. in: Hallo, W. W., Moyer, 1.e. and
Perdue, L.G. eds. Scripture in Context II. Winona
Lake. Eisenbrauns: 1- 17.
Hallo, W.W. 1993. Games in the Biblical World. EI 24:
83*-88*.
Halpern, B. 1987. "Brisker Pipes than Poetry": the
Developement of Israelite Monotheism. in:
Neusner, 1., Levin, B. A and Frerichs, E. S. 005.
Judaic Perspectives on Ancient Israel. Atlanta.
Fortress Press: 77-115.
Halpern, B. 1991. The Lineages in seventh Century BCE:?
Kinship and the Rise of Individual Moral Liability.
in: Halpern, B. and Hobson, D. W. eds. Law and
Ideology in Monarchic Israel. JSOT Suppl. Series
124. Sheffield:11-107.
Hamilton, R W. 1935. Excavations at Tell Abu Hawam.
QDAP 4:1-69.
Handy, L. K. 1988. Hezekiah's unlikely Reform. ZAW 100:
111-116.
Handy, L. K. 1993. Review of Smith, M.S. 1990. 'The Early
History of God.' JNES 52/2: 157- 159.
Haran, M. 1992. The 'Incense Altars' in the Archaeological
Find and the warship of the Host of Heaven in the
Judean Kingdom. Tarbitz LXI: 321-332 (Hebrew).
Harding, L. 1937. Some Objects from Transjordan. PEQ:
253-255.
Harding, L. 1951. Two Iron Age Tombs in Amman.
ADAJ 1: 37, pI. xiv.
Harris, K. 1984. Sex, Ideology and Religion. The
Representation of Women in the Bible. New
Jersey. Barnes and Noble.
Hazor I-IV. Yadin, Y. a.o. 1959-1962. Hazor I-IV. The
Hebrew University. Magness Press.
Heaton, E. W. 1974. Everyday Life in Old Testament
Times. London. B.T. Batsford.
Hencke, O. 1959. Zur lage von Beth Peor. ZDPV 95: 155-
163.
Hermary, Antoine. 1992. Review of Bdhm, S. 1990. "Die
'nackte Gottin'. Topoi 2: 183-187.
Herr, L. G. 1993. What Ever Happened to the Ammonites?
BARev 19 :26-35, 68.
Herr, L.G. et. al. 1991. Madaba Plains Project: the 1989
Excavations at Tell el- 'Umeiri and Vicinity. ADAJ
35: 155-194.
Herzog, Z. a.o. 1984. The Israelite Fortress at Arad. BASOR
254: 1-34.
Herzog, Z. a.o. 1987. The Stratigraphy of Israelite Arad: A
Rejoinder. BASOR 267: 77-80.
Hestrin, Ruth. 1987. The Lachish Ewer and the Asherah.
IE! 37: 212-223.
Hestrin, Ruth. 1991. Understanding Asherah, BARev 17:
50-59.
Higgins, R A 1969. Greek Terracotta Figures. London.
The Trustees of the British Museum.
Hodder, I. 1982. Symbolic and Structural Archaeology.
Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Hodder, I. 1986. Reading the Past. Cambridge. Cambridge
University Press.
Holladay,1. S. 1976. On Sherds and Strata. in: Cross, F.
M. et.al. eds. Magnolia Dei: the Mighty Acts of
God. Garden City. Doubleday: 253-293.
Holladay, 1.S. 1987. Religion in Israel and Judah Under the
Monarchy: An Explicitly Archaeological
Approach. in: Miller, P. D, Hanson, P. D. and
123
McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient Israelite Religion.
Essays in Honor of F. M. Cross. Philadelphia.
Fortress Press: 249-299.
Holland, T. A 1975. A Typological and Archaeological
Study ofHuman and Animal Representations in the
Plastic Art of Palestine. PhD Thesis, Oxford
University.
Holland, T.A 1977. A Study of Palestinian Iron Age baked
Clay Figurines with special Reference to Jerusalem:
Cave 1. Levant 9: 121-155.
Holloway, S. W. 1992. The Case for Asyyrian Religious
Influence in Israel and Judah: Inference and
Evidence. Ph.D Dissertation, Chicago University.
Homes-Fredericq, D. 1987. Possible Phoenician Influences
in Jordan in the Iron Age. in: Hadidi, A ed.
SIHAJ III: 89-96.
Honor, L. L. 1926. Sennacherib's Invasion of Palestine.
New York. Columbia University Press.
Hooke, S. H. 1938. The Origins of Early Semitic Ritual.
London. The British Academy. Oxford University.
Hom, S.H. 1966. Did Sennacherib campaign Once or Twice
against Hezekiah? AUSS 4: 1-28.
Hubner, U. 1989. Das Fragment einer Tonfigurine von Tell
el-Milh. Uberlegungen zur Funkzion der sog.
Pfeilerfigurinen in der Israelitischen Volksreligion.
ZDPV 105: 47-55.
Hubner, U. 1992. Der Tanz um die Ascheren. UF 24:121-
132.
HUbner, U. 1993. Spiele und Spielzeug im Antiken Paliistina
(OBO 121). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag
Hutter, M. 1982. Uberlegungen zu Sennacheribs Palastinas-
feldzug im Jahr 701 V. Chr. BN 19: 24-30.
Hvidberg-Hansen, F. O. 1986. Uni-Ashtarte and Tanit-Iuno
Caelestis: two Phoenician Goddesses of Fertility
reconsidered from recent Archaeological
Discoveries. in: Bonano, A ed. Archaeology and
Fertility Cult in the Ancient Mediterranean.
Amsterdam. University of Malta Press: 170- 195.
Ibach, R 1978. in: Borras, RS. and Geraty, L.T. eds.
Heshbon 1976. The Fifth Campaign at Tell
ijesbn. Berien Springs. Andrews University.
Ibrahim, M. M. and Van der- Kooij, 1. 1983. Excavations
at Tell Deir 'AlIa, Season 1982. ADAJ27:577-586.
Ikeda, Y. 1993. Because their Shade is Good - Ashera in
the Early Israelite Religion. in: Matsushima, E. ed.
Official Cult and Popular Religion in the Ancient
Near East. Heidelberg. Universifatsverlag: 56-80.
Ikosi, Gloria. 1991 -2. Unpublished Terracottas from Ajia
Irini. Medelhavsmuseet Bulletin 26-27. Stockholm:
33-84.
Ioannides, G.C. 1992. Secondary Treatment of Prehistoric
Figurines. An Example from Chalcolithic Cyprus.
Studies in honor of V. Karageorghis. Nicosia: 37-
40.
Isserlin, B. S. 1. 1976. On Some Figurines of "Lamp
Goddess" from Transjordan. Rivista de la
Universidado Compultense Hamenaje a Garcia
Bellido I. Vol 25: 138-142.

Jacobs, P. 1992. Iron Age HalifRevisited. Lahavewsletter
no. 51, September 1992 (ed. J. Seger. Without
page numbers).
Jacobs, P. 1993. News from the Field. Lahav. ASOR
Newsletter 43/3, Fall 1993: 4-5.
Jacobs, P. 1994. Tell Halif. IE! 44/1-2: 152-156.
Jacobsen, Th. 1987. The Graven Image. in: Miller, P.D.,
Hanson, P. D. and McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient
Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of F. M.
Cross. Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 15-28.
James, Francis W. 1966. The Iron Age at Beth Shean. A
Study of Levels VI-IV. Philadelphia. The
University Museum.
Jeremias, J. 1993. Thron oder Wagen? Eine ausser-
gewohnliche Terakotte aus der spaten Eizenzeit in
Judah. in: Zwickel, W. ed. Biblische Welten.
Festschrift fur M. Metzger zu seinem 65
Geburtstag. Freiburg und Gottingen. Universitats-
verlag: 41-60.
Jericho III. 1981. Kenyon, K M. and Holland, T. A. eds.
Excavations at Jerciho Ill. The Architecture and
Stratigraphy of the Tell. London. British School
of Archaeology in Jerusalem.
Jericho IV. 1982. Kenyon, K M. and Holland, T. A. eds.
Excavations at Jerciho IV. The Pottery Type Series
and other Finds. London. British School of
Archaeology in Jerusalem.
Jericke, D. 1992. Tell es- Seba' Stratum V. ZDPV 108:
122-148.
Jerusalem I. 1985. Tushingham, A D. ed. Excavations in
Jerusalem 1961-1967, Vol. 1. Toronto. ROM.
Jerusalem II. 1990. Franken, H.l and Steiner M. L. eds.
Jerusalem 11: Excavations in Jerusalem 1961-
1967. Vol. II: The Iron Age Extramural Quarter
on the South West Hill. Oxford. Oxford University
Press.
Jirku, A 1967. The World of the Bible. London (German
Origin 1957).
Johns, C. N. 1948. Discoveries in Palestine Since 1939.
PEQ: 81-101
Jones, G. 1994. From Abiyam to Abijah. ZAW 106: 420-
433.
KaIlai, Z. 1960. The Northern Boundaries of Judah.
Jerusalem (Hebrew).
Kallai, Z. 1986. Historical Geography of the Bible. The
Tribal Territories of Israel. Jerusalem and Leiden.
Magness and Brill.
KamIah, Jens. 1993. Tell el- FublJar (Zarqu?) and die
Pflanzenhaltende Gottin in Pallistina. Ergebnisse
der Zeraqdn Surveys 1989. ZDPV 109/2: 101-127.
Karageorghis, V. 1977. Two Cypriote Sanctuaries of the
End ofthe Cypro-Archaic Period. Rome. Consiglio
Nazionalle delle Richerche.
Karageorghis, V. 1987. The Terracottas. in: Karageorghis,
V. and Picard, O. eds. La nlcropole d'Amathonthe
tombes 113-367. Nicosia. (Etudes Chypriotes IX).
Karageorghis, V. 1993. The Coroplastic Art of Ancient
Cyprus 11. Late Cypriote II - Cypro Archaic III.
Nicosia. A. G. Levantis Foundation.
124
Karageorghis, V. 1994. The Coroplastic Art of Ancient
Cyprus lILA Large Scale Sculpture. Nicosia. AG.
Levantis Foundation.
Keel, O. 1972. Die Welt der Altorientalischen Bildsymbolik
und das Alte Testament: Am Biespiel der Psalmen.
English ed. 1978, The Symbolism of the Biblical
World. London. SPCK (trans. by T.l Hallett).
Keel, O. 1977. Vogel als Boten. Freiburg. OBO 14.
Keel, O. and Uehlinger, C. 1992. Giittinen, Giitter und
Gottessymbole. Frieburg. Herder Verlag.
Keisan I. 1980. Briend, l and Humbert, l P. eds. Tell
Keisan (1971-1976). Une citl phenicienne en
Galilee. Paris. Gabalda.
Kelley, C.P. 1994. Who did the Iconoclasm in the Dura
Synagogue? BASOR 295: 57-72.
Kelm, G. L. and Mazar, A 1982. Three Seasons of
Excavations at Tel Batash - Biblical Timna.
BASOR 248: 1-36.
Kelm, G. L. and Mazar, A 1991. Tel Batash (Timnah)
Excavations: Third Preliminary Report, 1984-
1989. AASOR Supplement 27: 47-67.
Kelso, r. L. 1962. Pottery. IDB 111. Nashville: 846- 853.
Kelso, lL. 1968. The Excavation of Bethel (1934-1960).
AASOR 39.
Kempinski, A 1993. Megiddo. A City State and Royal
Centre in North Israel. Tel Aviv (Hebrew. English
Version 1989, Bonn).
Kempinski, A 1993b. Gezer. Review Article. IE! 43/2: 173-
180.
Kempinski, A et. al. 1981. Excavations at Tel Masos: 1972,
1974, 1975. EI 15: 154-180 (Hebrew).
Kenyon, KM. 1967. Jerusalem. Excavating 3000 Years of
History. London. Thames and Hudson.
Kenyon, KM. 1974. Digging up Jerusalem. New York and
Washington. Praeger.
Kenyon, K 1976. The Date of the Destruction of Iron Age
Beer Sheba. PEQ 108: 63-64.
Kerkhof, Vera. 1969. Catalogue of the Shechem Collection
in the Rijksmuseum Van Oudheden in Leiden.
Oudheidkundige Mededelingen 50: 28-109.
Kertesz, Trude. 1976. The Breaking of Offerings in the Cult
of Hathor. TA 3: 134-136.
Kertesz, Trude. 1989. Terracottas and worked Bone
Artifacts. in: Herzog, Z., Rapp, G. and Negbi, Ora.
eds. Tel Michal 1. Excavations at Tel Michal,
Israel. Tel Aviv University: 361-364.
Kippenberg, H. G. 1985-6. Introduction. in: Kippenberg,
H. G. et. al. eds. Approaches to Iconology. Visible
Religion IV-V: vii-x,
Kitchen, K A. 1982-3. Further Thoughts on Egyptian
Chronology in the Third Intermediate Period. RdE
34: 59-69.
Kitchen, KA 1983. Egypt, the Levant and Assyria in 701
B.C. In: Gorg, M. ed. Fonte Atque Pontes.
Festgabe fUr H. Brunner. Wiesbaden.
Harrassowitz: 243-253.
Kitchen, KA. 1986. Egypt and Israel during the First
Millennium B.C. in: Emerton, led. Supplement to
VT 40 (Congress Volume). Leiden. Brill: 107-123.
Kitchen, K.A 1989. The Fall and Rise of Covenant, Law
and Treaty. Tyndale Bulletin 40: 118-135.
Klein, RW. 1983. Abiyah's Campaign against the North (2
Chr. 13) - What were the Chronicler's Sources?
ZAW95: 210-217.
Kletter, R 1991. The Iscribed Weights of the Kingdom of
Judah. TA 18: 121-163.
Kletter, R In Press A 'Pots and People': Artifacts and
Political Borders in Late Iron Age Judah. Levant.
Kletter, R In Press B. The Figurines from Tel 'Ira. in: Beit
-Arieh, I. ed. Tel 'Ira Excavation Report.
Kloner, A 1992. Maresha. Qadmoniot 95-96: 70-85
(Hebrew).
Koch, K 1988. Aschera als Himmelskonigin in Jerusalem.
UF 20: 97-120.
Kochavi, M. 1970. The First Season of excavations at Tel
Malhata. Qadmoniot 9: 22-24 (Hebrew).
Kochavi, M. 1973. Khirbet RabGd - Ancient Debir. in:
Aharoni, Y. ed. Excavations and Studies. Essays in
Honor of Professor Sh. Yeivin. Tel Aviv
University: 49-76 (Hebrew).
Kochavi, M. 1974. Khirbet RabGd = Debir. TA 1: 1-33.
Kochavi, M. 1975. Tel Aphek. IE! 26: 5lf.
Kochman, M. 1982. "Yehud Medinta" in the Light of the
Seal Impressions YHWD-PHW. Cathedra 24:3-30
(Hebew).
Koenig, Y. 1990. Les textes d'envoGtement de Mirgissa.
RdE 41: 101-119.
Konkel, AH. 1993. The Sources of the Story of Hezekiah in
the Book ofIsaiah. VT 43/4: 462-482.
Kutsch, E. 1974. Das Jahr des Katastrophe: 587 V. Chr.
Biblica 55: 521-545.
Kyle, M. G. 1977. Excavating Kiriath-Sepher's Ten Cities.
NY. Arno Press.
Kyle-McCarter, P. 1987. Aspects of the Religion of the
Israelite Monarchy. in: Miller, P. D., Hanson, P.
D. and McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient Israelite
Religion. Essays in Honor of F.M. Cross.
Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 137-156.
Laato, A 1992. Joshia and David Redivivus. Stockholm.
Almquist and Wiksell.
Lachish III. 1953. Tufnell, Olga. ed. Lachish 111. The Iron
Age. Oxford. Oxford University Press.
Lachish IV. 1958. Tufnell, Olga. ed. Lachish IV. The
Bronze Age. Oxford. Oxford University Press.
Lachish V. 1975. Aharoni, Y. ed.Investigations at Lachish.
Gateway.
Lagro, T. and Noordhuizen, D. 1987. Iron Age Pottery from
Jerusalem. A Preliminary Classification of the
Pottery found in Two Caves during the 1961 - 1967
Kenyon Excavtions. in: Van As, A ed. A Lundquist, J. M. 1983. What is a Temple? A Preliminary
Knapsack full of Pottery (Newsletter- Department
of Pottery Technology 5): 1-24.
Lambert, W.G. 1982. Booty from Egypt? JJS 33: 61-69.
Lamon, RS. and Shipton, G.M. 1939. Megiddo 1. Seasons
of 1925-34. Strata I-IV. Chicago. OIP XLIII.
Lapp, P. W. 1964. The 1963 Excavation at Tell Ta'annek.
BASOR 173: 4-44.
Lapp, P. W. 1967. The 1966 Excavations at Tell Ta'anek.
BASOR 185: 2-39.
125
Lapp, P. W. 1981. The third Campaign at Tel el Fill: The
Excavations of 1964. AASOR 45.
a
Leclant, J. 1960. Astarte cheval d'apres les representations
Egyptiennes. Syria: 1-67.
Lee, T. G. 1993. The Jasper Cylinder Seal of ~S1rrbanipal
and Nabonidus' making of Sin's Statue. Revue
d'Assyriologiques et d'Archeologie Orientale 87/2:
131-136.
Lemaire, A. 1977. Les inscriptions de Khirbet el-Qdm et
l'Asherah de YHWE. RB 84: 595-608.
Lemaire, A 1994. Deesses et dieux de Syrie-Palestine
d'apres les inscriptions (c. 1000-500 Av. N. E.).
in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A eds. Ein
Gott Allein? Freiburg (OBO 139).
Universitatsverlag: 127-158.
Lemche, N.P. 1992. The God of Hosea. in: Ulrich, E. a.o.
eds. Priests, Prophets and Scribes. Essays in
Honour of Joseph Blenkinsopp. Sheffield. JSOT
Supplement Series 149:241-257.
Liebowitz, H. 1984. The Late Bronze Age II and Iron Age
Strata at Tel Yenoam. Qadmoniot 65: 12-15.
Linder, E. 1986. The Figurines from Shavey Zion - A
Rexamination. in: Yeda'aya, M. ed. The Western
Galilee Antiquities. Haifa: 409-415 (Hebrew).
Lipinski, E. 1972. The Egypto - Babylonian War of the
Winter 601 - 600 B.C. Annali Istituto Orientale di
Napoli 32 (n.s.xXII): 235-241.
Lipiriski, E. 1984. Vestiges ph~nicien d'Andalousie.
Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica 15: 81-132.
Lipiriski, E. 1986. The Syro - Palestinian Iconography of
Women and Goddess. Review Article. IE! 36: 87-
98.
Liverani, M. 1990. Prestige and Interset. International
Relations in the Near East ca. 1600-1100 BC.
Padova. Sargon SRL.
Ljung, I. 1989. Silence or Suppression. Attitudes towards
Women in the Old Testament. Uppsala.
Loretz, O. 1992. Die Teraphim als "Ahnen- Getter-
Figur(in)en" im Lichte der Texte aus Nuzi, Emar
und Ugarit. UF24: 133-178.
Loretz, O. 1994. Das "Ahnen- und Gotterstatuen- Verbot"
im Dekalog und die Einzigkeit Jahwes... in:
Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A. eds. Ein
Gott allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg.
Universitatsverlag: 491- 27.
Loud, G. 1948. Megiddo 11. Chicago (OIP 62). Chicago
University Press.
Lowery, R H. 1991. The Reforming Kings. Cult and Society
in First Temple Judah. JSOT Supplement Series
120. Sheffield.
Typology. in: Huffmaon, H.B., Spina, F.A. and
Green, R W. eds. The Quest for the Kingdom of
God: Studies in Honor of G. E. Mendenhall.
Winona Lake. Eisenbrauns: 205-219.
Lux, O. 1972. Vorlaufiger Bericht uber die Ausgrabung
unter den Erldserkirche im Muristan in der Altstadt
von Jerusalem in den Jahren 1970 und 1971. ZDPV
88: 185-201.

Ma'ayah, F.S. 1960. Recent Archaeological Discoveries in
Jordan. ADAJ 4-5: 114-116.
Macalister, R A. S. 1903. Fourth Quarterly Report on the
Excavation at Gezer. PEFQS: 194-228.
Macalister, R A. S. 1905. Why did Rachel steal the
Teraphim of Laban? PEFQS: 270-271.
Macalister, R A. S. 1906. Bible Side Lights from the
Mound ofGezer. London.
Macalister, R A. S. 1915. Some Interesting Pottery
Remains. PEFQS: 35-37.
Macalister, R A. S. and Duncan, 1. G. 1926. Excavations on
the Hill ofOphel, Jerusalem. PEFA IV.
Mackenzie, D. 1912-13. Excavations at Ain Shems (Beth
Shemesh). PEFA II.
Maisler, B. see: Mazar, B.
Malamat, A. 1975. The Historical Background of Josiah's
Encounter with Necho at Megoddo. EI 12:83-90
(Hebrew).
Malamat, A. 1982. The Last Days of Judah. in: The History
ofthe People ofIsrael. The Age ofthe Monarchies.
Political History. Am Oved (Hebrew).
Malamat, A 1983. Israel in Biblical Times. Historical
Essays. Jerusalem (Hebrew).
Malamat, A 1988. The Kingdom of Judah between Egypt
and Babylon: a Small State within a Great Power
Confrontation. in: Classen, W. ed. Text and
Context. Studies for F.C. Fensham (JSOT
Supplement Series 48). Sheffield: 117-129.
Malinowski, B. 1925. Magic, Science and Religion. Repr.
in: Needham, 1. ed. Magic, Science and Religion
and Other Essays. Macmillan: 17-92.
Margalith, O. 1994. A New Type of Ashearh Figurine? VT
44/1: 109-115.
Masos I. 1983. Fritz, V. and Kempinski, A eds. Ergebnisse
uber die Ausgrabungen auf der IJirbet el-M~a~ (Tel
MJo~). Wiesbaden. Harrassowitz.
Matsushima, E. 1993. Divine Statues in Ancient
Mesopotamia: their Fashioning and Clothing and
their Interaction with the Society. in: Official Cult
and Popular Religion in the Ancient Near East.
Heidelberg. Universitatsverlag: 209-219.
Mauss, M. 1950. A General Theory of Magic. English
trans. 1972 by R Brain, London. Routhledge.
May, 1. G. 1935. Material Remains of the Megiddo Cult.
OIP 26. University of Chicago Press.
Mayes, AH.D. 1983. The Story ofIsrael between Settlement
and Exile. A Reductional Study of the
Deuteronomistic History. London. SCM Press.
Mazar, A 1980. Excavations at Tel Qasile I. Qedem 12.
Mazar, A 1985. Between Judah and Philistia: Timnah (Tel
Batash) in the Iron Age II. 1 18: 300-324
(Hebrew).
Mazar, A 1985b. Pottery Plaques depicting Goddesses
Standing in Temple Facades. Michmanim 2:5-18.
Mazar, A 1990. Archaeology ofthe Land ofthe Bible. NY.
Doubleday.
Mazar, A, Amit, D. and Illan, Z. 1984. The "Border Road"
between Michmash and Jericho and Excavations at
Horvat Shilha. EI 17: 236-250 (Hebrew).
Mazar, A and Kelm, G. L. 1980. Canaanites, Philistines
and Israelites at Timna (Tel Batash). Qadmoniot
51-52: 89-97.
Mazar, A and Netzer, E. 1986. On the Israelite Fortress at
Arad. BASOR 263: 87-90.
Mazar (Maizler), B. 1951. The Excavations at Tel Qasile.
Preliminary Report III. IE! 1/4: 194-218.
Mazar, B. 1963. Ein Gedi. Archaeological Excavations 1961
-2. Jerusalem (Hebrew. English version 1966,
'Atiqot V.
Mazar, B. 1964. Sennacherib's Judean Campaign. in: Liver,
1. ed. The Military History ofthe Land ofIsrael in
Biblical Times. Ma'arachot: 286-295 (Hebrew).
Mazar, Eilat 1979. Archaeological Evidence for the "Cows
of the Bashan who are in the Mountains of
Samaria". in: Festschrift R.R. Hecht. Jerusalem.
Koren: 151-156.
Mazar, Eilat 1985. Edomite Pottery from the End of the
Iron Age. IE! 35: 253-269.
Mazar, Eilat. 1990. A Horseman's Tomb at Akhziv.
Qadmoniot 91-92: 104-109 (Hebrew).
Mazar, Eilat 1994. Phoenician Ashlar Built Iron Age Tombs
at Achzib. Qadmoniot 105-106: 29-33 (Hebrew).
Mazar, Eilat and B. 1989. Excavations in the South of the
Temple Mount. Qedem 29.
McCarthy, D.1. 1973. Old Testament Covenant. A Survey
of Current Opinions. Oxford. 2nd. ed. Blackwell.
McCown, C. 1947. see: TN 1.
Meerschaert, Camille. 1991. Les musiciens dans la
coroplastie chypriote de l'~poque archaique. in:
Vandenabeele, Frieda and Laffineur, Reds.
Cypriote Terracottas. Brussels and Liege. Vrije
Universiteit: 183-192.
Mendenhall, G. E. 1985. The Worship of Baal and Asherah.
in: Kort, Ann and Morschauser, S. eds. Biblical
and Related Studies Presented to Sammuel Iwry.
Winona Lake. Eisenbrauns: 147-58.
Meshell, Z. 1994. Two Aspects in the Excavation of
Kuntillet 'Ajrud. in: Dietrich, W. and
Klopfenstein, M.A. eds. in Gott a//ein? (OBO
139). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag: 99-104.
Mettinger, T. N. D. 1994. Aniconism - A West Semitic
Context for the Israelite Phenomenon? in:
Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M. A eds. Ein Gott
allein? (OBO 139). Freiburg. Universitatsverlag:
159-178.
Meyer, G. R. 1970. Altorientalische Denkmdler im Vorder-
asiatisches Museum zu Berlin. Leipzig. Seeman.
Meyers, Carol. 1987. A Terracottta at the Harvard Semitic
Museum and Disc-Holding Female Figures
Reconsidered. IE! 37: 116-122.
Meyers, Carol. 1988. Discovering Eve. Ancient Israelite
Women in Context. Oxford University Press.
Meyers, Carol. 1991. Of Drums and Damsels. Women's
Performance in Ancient Israel. BA 54:16-27.
Miller, P. D. 1986. The Absence of the Goddess in Israelite
Religion. HAR 10: 239-248.
Mitchell, T. C. 1988. The Bible in the British Museum:
Interpreting the Evidence. British Museum
Publications. London.
Mitchell, T. C. 1992. The Music of the Old Testament
Reconsidered. PEQ 124:124-143.
Mittmann, S. 1976. Amos 3,12-15 und das Bett der
Samarier. ZDPV 92: 149-167.
Mittmann, S. 1981. Die Grabinschrift des Siingers Uriahu.
ZDPV 97: 139-152.
Mittmann, S. 1990. Hizkia und die Philister. JNSL XVI:
91-106.
Mommsen, H., Perlman, I. and Yellin, 1. 1984. The
Provinience of the Imlk Jars. IE! 34: 89-113.
Montgomery, 1.A 1951. A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Books of Kings (ICC).
Edinburgh. Clark.
Moorey, P.RS. 1994. The True and the False. in: Cholidis,
Nadja. et. al. eds. Beschreiben und Deuten der
Archdologie des Alten Orients. Festschrift fUr Ruth
Mayer-Opificius. Miinster, Ugarit Verlag: 201-
212.
Moorey, P.RS. and Fleming, S. 1984. Problems in the
Study of the Anthropomorphic Metal Statuary from
Syro- Palestine before 330 B.C. Levant XVI: 67-
90.
Morris, B. 1987. Anthropological Studies of Religion. An
Introductory Text. Cambridge University Press.
Morris, Sarah P. 1992. Daidalos and the Origins of Greek
Art. Princeton. Princeton University Press.
Morton, W. H. 1989. The 1954, 55 and 65 Excavations at
Dhiban in Jordan. in: Dearman, A ed. Studies in
the Mesha Inscription and Moab. Atlanta. Scholars
Press: 239-246.
Moscati, S. 1964. L'Archeologia Italiana nel Vicino Oriente.
., Or. An. III: 1-14.
Moscati, S. 1968. The World ofthe Phoenicians. London.
Muhly, 1. D. 1980. Bronze Figurines and Near-Eastern
Metalwork. IE! 30:148-161.
Mulder, M. 1. 1994. Review of: Ackerman, Susan. 1992.
Under every Green Tree ... Bi. Or. 51: 375-377.
Musberg, R. 1992. The Figurines. in: Zertal, A. ed. The
Manasseh Hill Country Survey. Shechem Syncline.
Haifa (Hebrew):527-533.
Na'aman, N. 1974. Sennacherib's Letter to God on his
Campaign to Judah. BASOR 214: 25-39.
Na'aman, N. 1979. Sennacherib's Campaign to Judah and
the Date of the Lmlk Stamps. VT 29: 61-86.
Na'aman, N. 1986. Hezekiah's fortified Cities and the Lmlk
Stamps. BASOR 261: 5-21.
Na'aman, N. 1986b. Borders and Districts in Biblical
Historiography. Simor. Jerusalem Biblical Studies
4.
Na'aman, N. 1986c. Historical and Chronological Notes on
the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the Eight
Century B.C. VT 36: 71-92.
Na'aman, N. 1987. The Negev in the Last Century of the
Kingdom of Judah. Cathedra 42:3-15.
Na'aman, N. 1987b. The Historical Background of the
Battle between Amaziah and Jehoash. Shnaton X:'
211-217 (Hebrew).
Na'aman, N. 1988. The Date of 2 Chronicles 11:5-10 - A
Reply to Y. Garfinkel. BASOR 271: 74-77.
Na'aman, N. 1989. The Kingdom of Judah under Joshia.
Zion 54: 17-71 (Hebrew. English ver. 1991, TA
18/1:3-71).
Na'aman, N. 1991. Chronology and History in the Late
Assyrian Empire (631-619 B.C.). Z4 81/11: 243-
267.
Na'aman, N. 1992. Nebuchadrezzar's Campaign in Year
603 BCE. BN 62: 41-44.
Na'aman, N. 1992b. Israel, Edom and Egypt in the 10th
Century B.C.E. TA 19: 71-93.
Na'aman, N. 1993. Population Changes in Palestine
following Assyrian Deportations. TA 20: 104-
124.
Na'aman, N. 1994. Ahaz's and Hezekiah's Policy toward
Assyria in the Days of Sargon II and Sennacherib's
Early Years. Zion 59:5-27 (Hebrew).
Na'aman, N. and Zadok, R 1988. Sargon II's Deportations
to Israel and Philistia (716-708 B.C.). JCS 40: 36-
46.
Nadelman, Y. 1989. Iron Age II Clay Fragments from the
Excavations. Appendix A in: Mazar, E. and
Mazar, B. eds. Excavations in the South of the
Temple. Qedem 29:123-25.
Nakhai, B.P. 1994. What's a Bamah? How Sacred Space
functioned in Ancient Israel. BARev 20/3: 18-29,
77.
Naveh, J. 1958. Khirbat al Muqana' - Ekron. lEI 8: 87-100.
Naveh, 1. 1962. More Hebrew Inscriptions from Mesad
Hashavyahu. lEI 12: 27-32.
Naveh, J. 1979. Graffiti and Dedications. BASOR 235: 27-
30.
Negbi, Ora. 1966. A Deposit of Terracottas and Statuettes
from Tel Sippor. 'Atiqot VI [ES].
Nelson, RD. 1981. The Double Redaction of the
Deuteronomistic History. Sheffield. (JSOT
Supplement Series 18).
Neufeld, E. 1971. Hygiene Conditions in Ancient Israel
(Iron Age). BA 34/2:42-66 (rep. from: Journal of
the History of Medicine and Applied Sciences
XXV,1970).
Nicholls, R V. 1952. Type, Group and Series: A
Reconsideration of Some coroplastic Fundamentals.
ABSA XLVII: 217-226.
Nicholls, R. V. 1970. Greek Votive Statuettes and Religious
Continuity, c. 1200-700 B.C. in: Harris, B. F. ed.
Auckland Classical Essays Presented to E. M
Blaiklock. Auckland University: 1-37.
Nicholson, E. W. 1986. Covenant in a Century of Study
since Wellhausen. OTS 24: 54-69.
Niemeier, W.D. 1994. Greek Pottery: Evidence for Greek
Mercenaries at Kabri. in: Niemeier, W. D. and
Kempinski, A eds. Excavations at Kabri.
Preliminary Report of 1992-1993. Seasons 7-8:
*31-*38.
Noblecourt, D. 1953. "Concubines du mort" et meres de
famille au Moyen Empire. BIFAO 53: 7-47.
North, R. 1974. Does Archaeology Prove Chronicles
Sources? in: Bream, H.N. et. al. eds. Old
Testament Studies in Honor of 1.M. Myers.
Philadelphia. Temple University: 375-401.

126 127
North, R. 1989. Yahweh's Asherah. in: Horgan, M. P. and
Kobelski, P. J. 008. To Touch the Text. Biblical
Studies in Honour of J.A Fitzmyer. N.Y.
Crossboards.
Noth, M. 1943. The Deuteronomistic History (trans. to
English 1981). JSOT Supplement Series 15.
Sheffield.
Noth, M. 1960. The History ofIsrael. 2nd ed., London. A
Black.
Nylander, C. 1980. Earless in Nineveh: Who mutilated
"Sargon's" Head? AJA 84: 329-333.
Oates, Jane. 1965. Assyrian Chronology, 631-612 B.C.
Iraq 27: 135-159.
Ockinga, B. 1984. Die Giiuebenbtldlichkeit im Alten
:4."gypten und im Alten Testament. Wiesbaden.
Harrassowitz.
O'Connor, M. 1987. The Poetic Inscription from Kh. el-
K8m. fIT 37: 224-230.
Oded, B. 1977. Joshia and the Deuteronomic Reformation.
in: Hayes, J. H. and Miller, J. M. eds. Israelite and
Judean History. SCM Press: 460-468.
Oded, B. 1994. Biblical World: Kings I. Davidson-Ati Press
(Hebrew).
Ohata, K. ed. 1967. Tel Zeror II. Preliminary Report of
the Excavation, Second Season 1965. Tokyo.
Ohata, K. 1974. The Tel Zeror Excavations. Japanese
Society for Near Eastern Studies.
Ofer, A 1990. Excavations at Biblical Hebron. Qadmoniot
87-88:88-93 (Hebrew).
Ofer, A 1990b. The Judean Hill Country - from Nomadism
to Monarchy. in: Na'arnan, N. and Finkelstein, I.
eds. Archaeological and Historical Aspects of
Early Israel. Jerusalem: 155-214 (Hebrew).
Ofer, A 1993. The Highland ofJudah during the Biblical
Period. Ph.D Thesis, Tel Aviv University
(Hebrew).
Ofer, Z. 1954. A Figurine from the Period of the Monarchy
brough Evidence. Beer Sheba Diary 12.12.1954.
Ofer, Z. 1957. Beer Sheba and its Antiquities. ''Ma Mi-
negev" 1:10-11; 2:9 (Hebrew).
Ofer, Z. 1965. Beer Sheba. in: Israel from Dan to Elat.
Vol. 5. Tel Aviv. Ministry of Defence (Hebrew).
Olyan, S. M. 1985. Problems in the History ofthe Cult and
Priesthood in Ancient Israel. Ph.D. Thesis.
Harvard University.
Oppenheim, A L. 1949. The Golden Garments of the Gods.
JJVES 8: 172-193.
Oren E.D. 1973. The Northern Cemetery of Beth Shean.
Leiden. Brill.
Oren, E.D. 1982. Ziqlag - A Biblical City on the Edge of
the Negev. BA 45: 155-166.
Oren, E. D. 1986. Land of Gerar Expedition: Preliminary
Report for the Seasons of 1982 and 1983. RASOR
Supplement 24: 57-87.
Oren, E.D. 1988. Ziqlag - A Biblical City in the Southern
Shephelah. in: Stern, E. and Urman, D. eds. Man
and Environment in the Southern Shephelah.
Massada: 130-138.
128
Oren, E. D. 1991. Tell Haror - After Six Seasons.
Qadmoniot 93-94: 2-19 (Hebrew).
Oren, E.D. 1993. Ethnicity and Regional Archaeology: the
Western Negev under Assyrian Rule. in: Biran, A
and Aviram, J. eds. Biblical Archaeology Today
II. Jerusalem. IES:I02-105.
Oren, E.D. and Netzer, E. 1974. Tel Sera'. IE! 24: 264-266.
Oren, Ronit. 1994. The Figurines from Area F. in:
Kempinski, A and Niemeier, W. D. eds.
Excavations at Kabri. Preliminary report of 1992-
1993 Seasons (7-8). Tel Aviv: 30-35.
Orlinski, H. M. 1940. The Kings - Ishaiah Recensions of the
Hezekiah Story. JQR 30: 33-49.
Orlinski, H. M. 1954. Understanding the Bible through
History and Archaeology. NY. Ktav.
Oman, Tallay. 1983. The Dayan Collection. Israel Museum
Journal II: 5-18.
Oman, Tallay. 1986. Man and his Land - Selection from M.
Dayan Collection. Israel Museum Catalogue no.
270 (Hebrew).
Oman, Tallay. 1993. The Transition from Figured to Non-
Figured Representation in First Millennium
Mesopotamian Glyptic. in: Seals and Sealing in
the Ancient World. Abstracts of Lectures, The
Bible Lands Museum, Jerusalem.
Orphanides, AG. 1990. The Meaning and Function of the
Bronze Age Terracotta Anthropomorphic Figurines
from Cyprus. RDAC: 45- 50.
Osborne, R 1993. Ala Greque. Review ofW. Burkert, The
Orientalizing Revolution. Journal of
Mediterranean Archaeology 6/2: 231-237.
Parpola, S. 1980. The Murderers of Sennacherib. in: Death
in Mesopotamia (Mesopotamia 8): 171-182.
Patai, R 1967. The Hebrew Goddess. New York. Ktav.
Patai, R 1987. Folk Religion: Folk Judaism. The
Encyclopedia of Religion V. New York.
Macmilan: 378-382.
Paul, S. M. and Dever, W. G. 1977. Biblical Archaeology.
Jerusalem. Keter.
Peltenburg, E. J. 1988. A Cypriot Model for Prehistoric
Ritual. Antiquity 62 (235): 289-293.
Petrie, W. M. F. 1928. Gerar. London. British School of
Archaeology in Egypt.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1931, 1933, 1934. Ancient Gaza I, III, IV.
London. British School of Archaeology in Egypt.
Petrie, W. M. F. 1937. Anthedon. London. British School
of Archaeology in Egypt.
Petrie, W. M. F. 1952. Ancient Gaza V. London. British
School of Archaeology in Egypt.
Pettey, R J. 1985. Asherah: Goddess of Israel? Ph.D.
Thesis, Marquette University, Milwaukee.
Phytian-Adams, M. A 1923. Report on the Stratification of
Askalon. PEF: 60-84.
Piccirillo, M. 1983. Studium Biblicum Franciscum Museum
no. 6. Jerusalem.
Pilali-Papasteriou, Angeliki. 1989. Social Evidence from
the Interpretation of Middle Minoan Figurines. in:
Hodder, I. ed. The Meaning ofThings. Material
Culture and Symbolic Expression. London. Unwin Hyman:
96-101.
Pilz, E. 1924. Die weiblischen Gottheiten Kanaans. ZDPV
47: 131-168.
Pinch, Geraldine. 1983. Childbirth and Female Figurines at
Deir el-Medina and el-Amama, OR 52: 405-414.
Pinch, Geraldine. 1993. Votive Offerings to Hathor. Oxford.
Griffith Institute, Ashmolean Museum.
Platt, E. 1989. Umeiri Objects. in: Geraty, T. et.al. eds.
Madaba Plains Project. Andrews University Press:
355-366.
Posener-Krieger, P. 1988. Les travaux de I'IFAO en 1984-5.
BIFAO 85: 297-298.
Potts, T.F. 1988. Preliminary Report on the Eighth and
Ninth Seasons of Excavations by the University of
Sydney at Pella (Tabaqat Fahl), 1986 and 1987.
ADAJ 32:115-149.
Prausnitz, M.W. 1982. Die Nekropolen von Akhzib und die
Entwicklung der Keramik von 10 bis 7 Jh. V. Chr.
in: Niemeyer, H.G. ed. Phiinizer im Westen. Mainz.
VonZabern: 31-44.
Price, Theodora H. 1978. Kourotrophos. Cults and
Representations ofGreek Nursing Deities. Leiden.
Brill.
Pritchard, J. B. 1943. Palestinian Figurines in Relation to
Certain Goddesses known through Literature. New
Haven (AOS 24).
Pritchard, J.B. 1954. The Ancient Near East in Puctures
Relating to the Old Testament (ANEP). Princeton.
Princeton University.
Pritchard, J. B. 1958. The Ancient Near East. An Anthology
of Texts and Pictures (ANET). Princeton.
Princeton University.
Pritchard, J.B. 1965. A Cosmopolitan Culture of the Late
Bronze Age. Expedition 7/4: 26-33.
Pritchard, J. B. 1968. An eighth Century Traveller.
Expedition 10: 26-29.
Pritchard, J.B. 1985. Tell el-Sa'idiyeh. Excavations on the
Tell 1964-1966. Pennsylvania. The University
Museum.
Pritchard, J. B. 1988. Sarepta IV. The Objects from Area
II, X. Beyrouth. Universite Libanaise.
a
Puech, E. 1993. Le vocable d' 'Attart burri - c~ trr Ugarit
et en Ph~nicie. UF 25: 327-330.
Raban, A and Stieglitz, RR 1993. Phoenicians on the
Northern Coast of Israel in the Biblical Periods.
Haifa. Hecht Museum, Catalogue no. 8.
Rainey, AF. 1975. The Fate of Lachish during the
Campaigns of Sennacherib and Nebuchadrezzar.
in: Lachish V.. 47-60.
Rainey, AF. 1982. Wine from the Royal Vineyards. BASOR
245: 57-62 (Hebrew version 1982, EI 16: 177-
181).
Rainey, AF. 1982b. Taharqa. Enc. Miqr. VIII: 926-928
(Hebrew).
Rainey, AF. 1983. The Biblical Shefelah of Judah. BASOR
251: 1-22.
Rainey, AF. 1987. Arad in the Later Days of the Judean
Monarchy. Cathedra 42: 16-25 (Hebrew).
129
Rainey, AF. 1993. Manasseh, King of Judah, in the
Whirlpool of the Seventh Century B.C.E. in:
Rainey, A F. et. al. eds. Kinattiitu la dar8ti. R
Kutscher Memorial. Tel-Aviv University. Institute
of Archaeology, Occasional Publications I: 147-
164.
Reed, W. L. 1949. The Asherah in the Old Testament. Fort
Worth. Texas Christian University Press.
Reese, D. S. and Sease, Catherine. 1993. Some Previously
unpublished Tridacna Shells. JJVES 52/2: 109-
128.
Reich, R 1989. A Third Season of Excavations at Mezad
Hashavyahu. EI20: 228-232.
Reich, R and Brandl, B. 1985. Gezer under Assyrian Rule.
PEQ 117: 41-54.
Reifenberg, A 1925. Ancient Hebrew Art (German Edition
1927. Paldstinensiche Kleinkunst. Berlin. RC.
Schmidt).
Renfrew, C. 1984. Approaches to Social Archaeology.
Cambridge, Mass.: 258-282.
Renfrew, C. 1985. The Archaeology ofCult. The Sanctuary
at Phylakopy. London. The British School of
Archaeology at Athens and Thames and Hudson.
Renfrew, C. and Cherry, J.F. eds. 1986. Peer Polity
Interaction and Socio - Political Change.
Cambridge. University Press.
Reviv, H. 1982. Judah from Hezekiah to Joshia. in:
Malarnat, A ed. The Age of the Monarchies -
Political History. Jerusalem. Am Oved:131- 139
(Hebrew).
Reyes, A T. 1994. Archaic Cyprus. Oxford. Clarendon
Press.
Riis, P. J. 1949. The Syrian Astarte Plaques and their
Western Connections. Berytus IX: 69-90.
Ritner, R K. 1992. Egyptian Magic: Questions of
Legitimacy, Religious Orthodoxy and Social
Deviance. in: Lloyd, A B. ed. Studies in
Pharaonic Religion and Society in Honour ofJ. G.
Griffiths. London. University of Chicago, Oriental
Institute Studies 54: 189-200.
Ritner, R K. 1993. The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian
Magical Practice. Chicago (saoc 54).
Rittig, D. 1977. Assyrisch - babylonische Kleinplastik
magischer Bedeutung vom 13.-6. Jh. v. Chr.
Munchen.
Rofe, A 1983. The Prophetical Stories. The Hebrew
University, Jerusalem. Magness (Hebrew).
Romano, Irene B. 1988. Early Greek Cult Images and Cult
Practices. in: Haag, R, Marinatos, N. and
Nordquist, G.C. eds. Early Greek Cult Practice.
Procceedings of the fifth International Symposium
at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 1986.
Stockholm: 127-133.
Rose, D.G. and Toombs, L.E. 1976. Four Seasons of
Excavation at Tell el-Hesi. AASOR 43: 109-150.
Rose, M. 1971. Der Ausschltesslichkeitsanspruch Jahwes.
Deuteronomische Schultheologie und die Volks-
frommigkeit in der spaten Konigszeit. Stu1tart.
Verlag W. Kohlhammer (Beitrage zur
Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament
VI/6).
Rowe, A 1940. The Four Canaanite Temples of Beth Shan
(pPS II/I). University of Pennsylvania.
Rowlands, M. et.al. eds.1987. Centre and Periphery in the
Ancient World (New Directions in Archaeology).
Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
RR I. Aharoni, Y. 1962. Excavations at Ramat Rahel
(Seasons 1959 and 1960). Rome. Universita di
Roma. Centro di Studi Semitici.
RR II. Aharoni, Y. 1964. Excavations at Ramat Rahel
(Seasons 1961 and 1962). Rome. Universita di
Roma. Centrodi Studi Semitici.
Rystedt, Eva 1992. Notes on the Rattle Scenes on Attic
Geometric Pottery. Opuscula Atheniensia XIX:
125-133.
Sadek, A I. 1988. Popular Religion in Egypt during the
New Kingdom. Hildesheim. Gerstenberg Verlag.
Saller, S. 1965-6. Iron Age Tombs at Nebo, Jordan. LA 16:
165-298.
Samaria I 1924. Reisner, G. A, Fisher, C. S. and Lyon, D.
G. eds. Harvard Excavations at Samaria, 1908-
1910. Vol I. Cambridge. Harvard University Press.
Samaria III 1957. Crowfoot, J. W., Crowfoot, I. M. and
Kenyon, K.M. The Objects from Samaria. London.
PEF.
Sass, B.1993. The Pre-Exilic Hebrew Seals: !eonism vs.
Aniconism. in: Sass, B. and Uehlinger, C. eds.
Studies in the Iconography of Northwest Semitic
Inscribed Seals (OBO 125). Frieburg: 194-256.
Schmidt- Colinet, Constanze 1981. Die Musikinstrumente in
der Kunst der A/ten Orient. Bonn. Bouvier Verlag.
Schmitt, G. 1990. Moreschet Gat und Libnah. Mit einem
Anhang: zu Micha 1:10-16. JNSL XVI: 153-172.
Schniedewind, W. M. 1991. The Source Citations of
Manasseh: King Manasseh in History and Homily.
VT 41/4: 450-461.
Schroer, Sylvia 1983. Zur Deutung der Hand unter der
Grabinschrift vom Ch. el-K8m. UF 15: 191-200.
Schroer, Sylvia 1987. In Israel gab es Bi/der. Nachrichten
von darstellen Kunst im Alten Testament. Freiburg.
Universitatsverlag.
Schumacher, G. 1908. Tell el Mutese//im. Leipzig. R
Haupt.
Schwartz, C. 1989. Dadalische Terrakotten aus Milet.
Ist.Mit. 39: 507-516.
Seeden, Helga 1979. A Small Clay Shrine in the AUB
Museum. Berytus 27: 7-25.
Segal, I.B. 1976. Popular Religion in Ancient Israel. JJS
27: 1-22.
Seger, I. 1987. Tel Gezer: Phase II Excavations. 1972-
1994. in: Perdue, L.G., Toombs, G.L. and Johnson,
G.L. eds. Archaeological and Biblical
Interpretation. Atlanta: 113-127.
Seger, I. 1988. The Location of Biblical Ziklag according to
Tel HalifExcavations. in: Stern, E. and Urman, D.
eds. Man and Environment in the Southern
Shephelah. Massada:139-150 (Hebrew).
Seger, I. 1992. Cobb Institute of Archaeology. Lahav
Newsletter no. 51, September 1992.
130
Seger, I. 1992b. Tel Halif. Notes and News. IE! 43/1: 66-
70.
Seitz, C. R 1993. Account A and the Annals of
Sennacherib: A Reassessment. JSOT 58: 47-57.
Sellers,O.R 1933. The Citadel of Beth Zur. Philadelphia.
Westminster Press.
Sellers, O.R et.al. 1968. The 1957 Excavation at Beth Zur.
AASOR 38.
Sellin, E. 1904. Tell Ta'annek. Wien. C. Gerod's Sohn
(English Translation by Hillers, D. 1962).
Sellin, OR 1927. Die Ausgrabung von Sichem. ZDPV 50:
205-211.
Sellin, E. and Watzinger, C. 1913. Jericho. Die Ergebnisse
der Ausgrabungen. Leipzig. I.C. Hinrichs.
Shavit, A 1992. The Ayalon Valley and its Vicinity During
the Bronze and Iron Ages. MA Thesis, Tel Aviv
University (Hebrew).
Shea, W.H. 1985. Sennacherib's Second Palestinian
Campaign. JBL 104: 401-418.
Shea, W.H. 1990. The Kh. el-K8m Inscription. VT 37/1:
50-63.
Shiloh, Y. 1979. Iron Age Sanctuaries and Cult Places in
Palestine. in: Cross, F.M. ed. Symposia.
Celebrating the Seventy Fifth Anniversary of the
Founding of the ASOR (1990-1975). Cambridge
MA: 147-157
Shiloh, y. 1984. Excavations at the City of David I. 1978-
1982. Interim Report of the First Five Seasons.
Qedem 19 (Hebrew and English).
Shiloh, Y. 1989. Judah and Jerusalem in the Eighth - Sixth
Centuries B.C.E. AASOR 49: 97-105.
Sinclair, A 1960. An Archaeological Study of Gibeah (Tell
el-F~). AASOR 34-35.
Singer, I. 1990. Toward an Identity of Dagon, the God of
the Philistines. Cathedra 54:17-42 (Hebrew).
Skorupki, John. 1976. Symbol and Theory. A Philosophical
Study of Theories of Religion in Social
Anthropology. Cambridge. Cambridge University
Press.
Smelik, K.AD. 1992. Converting the Past. Studies in
Ancient Israelite and Moabite Historiography.
Leiden. Brill.
Smith, M. S.1990. The Early History of God. Jahweh and
the other Deities in Ancient Israel. San Francisco.
Collins.
Smith, M. S. 1994. Yahweh and other Deities in Ancient
Israel: Observations on Old Problems and Recent
Trends. in: Dietrich, W. and Klopfenstein, M.A
eds. Ein Gott alleih? (OBO 139). Freiburg.
Universitatsverlag: 197-234.-
Sophocleous, S. 1985. Atlas des rGpresentations Chypro-
Archaiques des Divinites, GOterborg. P. Astroms
Forlag.
S_rensen, L. W. 1991. Cypriote Terracottas from Lindos in
the Light of New Discoveries. in: Vandenabeele,
Frieda and Laffineur, Reds. Cypriote Terracottas.
Procceedings of the First International Conference
of Cypriote Studies 1989. Brussels and Liege. Vrije
Universiteit: 225-240.
Spalinger, A 1973. The Year 712 B.C. and its Implications
for Egyptian History. JARCE 10: 95-101.
Spalinger, A 1974a. Esarhaddon and Egypt: an Analysis of
the first Invasion of Egypt. Orientalia 63: 316-326.
Spalinger, A 1974b. Assurbanipal and Egypt: a Source
Study. JAOS 94: 322-325.
Spalinger, A 1976. Psammetichus, King of Egypt: I.
JARCE XIII: 133-147.
Spalinger, A 1978. The Foreign Policy of Egypt Preceding
the Assyrian Conquest. CdE 53: 22-47.
Spycket, Agnes. 1992. Les figurines de Suse. Vol. I. Les
figurines humaines IVe-IIe millenaires Av. I.C.
Paris. Gabalda.
Spieckermann, H. 1982. Juda unter Assur in den
Sargonidenzeit. GOttingen. Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht.
Stager, L.E. 1975. Ancient Agriculture in the Judean
Desert. A Case Study ofthe Buqe'ah Valley. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Harvard University.
Stager, L.E. 1976. Farming in the Judean Desert during the
Iron Age. BASOR 221: 145-158.
Stager, L.E. 1985. The Archaeology of the Family in
Ancient Israel. BASOR 260: 1-35.
Starkey, I.L. 1937. Lachish as illustrating Bible History.
PEQ: 171-179.
Stern, E. 1970. Excavations at Gile'am (Kh. er-Rujm).
'Atiqot VI: 31-55 (Hebrew).
Stern, E. 1973. The Material Culture of the Land of the
Bible in the Persian Period, 538-332 Be.
Jerusalem (Hebrew).
Stern, E. 1989. What Happened to the Cult Figurines?
Israelite Religion after the Exile. BARev 15/4: 22-
29,53-54.
Stern, E. 1989b. Hazor, Dan and Megiddo in the Time of
Ahab and the Assyrian Period. EI20: 233-248.
Stern, E. 1992. Dor - The Ruler of the Seas. Jerusalem.
Bialik Institute (Hebrew).
Stern, E. 1994. The Jericho Region and the Eastern Border
of the Judean Kingdom in its last Days. EI 24: 192-
197 (Hebrew).
Stromberg, Agneta 1993. Male or Female? A
Methodological Study of Grave Gifts as Sex -
Indicators in Iron Age Burials from Athens.
Jonsered. P. Astrdms Forlag.
Supinska- Lcjvset, nona 1976. The Ustinov Collection. The
Palestinian Pottery. Oslo. Universitatsforlaget.
Supinska- Lf'vset, Ilona 1978. The Ustinov Collection. The
Terracottas. Oslo. Universitatsforlaget.
Suzuki, Y. 1992. A New Aspect on Occupation Policy by
King Josiah. AJBI 18: 31-61.
Tadmor, H. 1963. Chronology. Ene. Miqr. IV: 245-310
(Hebrew).
Tadmor, H. 1982. Treaty and Oath in the Ancient Near
East: A Historian's Approach. Shnaton V-VI: 149-
173.
Tadmor, H. 1985. Sennacherib's Campaign to Judah:
Historical and Historiographical Considerations.
Zion 50: 65-80 (Hebrew).
Tadmor, Miriam 1982. Female Cult Figurines in Late
Canaan and Early Israel. Archaeological Evidence.
in: Ishida, T. ed. Studies in the Period of David
131
and Solomon and Other Essays (First International
Symposium for Biblical Studies 1979). Tokyo.
Eisenbrauns: 139-173.
Talalay, Lauren E. 1987. Rethinking the Function of Clay
Figurine Legs from Neolithic Greece: An
Argument by Analogy. AJA 91: 161-169.
Tatton Brown, Veronica and Crouwel, I. 1992. A Terracotta
Horse and Rider in Brussels. in: Ioannides, G.C.
et.al. eds. Studies in Honour of Vassos
Karageorghis. Nicosia. Society for Cypriot Studies:
291-296.
Tatum, L. 1991. King Mannasseh and the Royal Fortress at
Horvat 'Uza. BA: 136-145.
Taylor, J.G. 1993. Yahweh and the Sun. Biblical and
Archaeological Evidence for Sun - Worship in
Ancient Israel. Sheffield. JSOT Supplement Series
111
Taylor, I.G. 1994. Was Yahweh Worshiped as the Sun?
BARev 20/3: 53-61, 90-91.
TBM II. Albright, W.F. ed. 1937. The Excavation of Tel
BeitMirsim. Vol. II. TheBronzeAge.AASOR 17.
TBM III. Albright, W.F. ed. 1943. The Excavation of Tel
Beit Mirsim. Vol. III. The Iron Age. AASOR 21-22.
Teixidor, 1. 1975. A Note on the Phoenician Inscriptions
from Spain. HTR 68: 197-198.
Teubal, Savina 1984. Sarah the Priestess. The First
Matriarch of Genesis. Chicago. Swallow Press.
Teubal, Savina. 1990. Hagar the Egyptian. The Lost
Tradition of the Matriarchs. San Francisco. Harper.
Thiele, E.R. 1965. The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew
Kings. A Reconsideration of the Chronology of the
Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Michigan.
Eardmans. 2nd. ed.
Tigay, I. H. 1986. You shall have no other Gods. Israelite
Religion in the Light of Hebrew Inscriptions.
Harvard Semitic Series 31. Atlanta. Scholars Press.
Tigay, I.H. 1987. Israelite Religion: The Onomastic and
Epigraphic Evidence. in: Miller, P. D., Hanson, P.
D. and McBride, S. D. eds. Ancient Israelite
Religion. Essays in Honor of F.M. Cross.
Philadelphia. Fortress Press: 157-194.
TN I. 1947. McCown, C. Tell en Nasbeh I: Archaeological
and Historical Results. Berkeley and New Haven.
Pacific Schools of Religion and the AASOR.
TN II 1947. Wampler, I.C. Tell en Nasbeh II: The Pottery.
Berkeley and New Haven. Pacific Schools of
Religion and the AASOR
Tooley, Angela M. I. 1991. Child's Toys or Ritual Objects?
GM 123: 101-111.
Toombs, L.E. 1983. Tell el Hesi, 1981. PEQ: 25-46.
Toombs, L.E. 1991. The Joint Expedition to Tel Hesi and
the Results of the Earlier Excavations. PEQ: 101-
113.
Tosi, M. 1988. Popular Cults at Deir el- Medina. in:
Egyptian Civilization. Religious Beliefs. Egyptian
Museum of Turin: 162-177.
Tubb, I. N. 1981. An Iron Age II Tomb Group from the
Bethlehem Region. London. British Museum
Occasional Papers no. 14.
Tubb,1.N. 1988. Tell es- Sa'idiyeh. Preliminary Report on
the First Three Seasons of renewed Excavations.
Levant 20: 23-88.
Tufnell, Olga 1953 see: Lachish III.
Tushingham, A.D. 1972. The Excavations at Dibon
(Dluo~) in Moab. AASOR XL.
Tushingham, AD. 1979. The Western Hill of Jerusalem
under the Monarchy. ZDPV 95: 39-55.
Tushingham, AD. 1988. The 1961-1967 Excavations in the
Armenian Garden, Jerusalem: A Response. PEQ:
142- 145.
Tushingham, AD. 1992. New Evidence Bearing on the
Two-WingedLMLK Stamp. BASOR 287: 61-65.
Ucko, P. J. 1968. Anthropomorphic Figurines of
Predynastic Egypt and Neolithic Crete, with
Compatible Material from the Predynastic Near
East and Mainland Greece. London. Szmilda.
Uehlinger, C. 1993. Northwest Inscribed Semitic Seals,
Iconography and Syro - Palestinian Religions of
Iron Age Il. in: Sass, B. and Uehlinger, C. eds.
Studies in the Iconography of Northwest Semitic
Inscribed Seals. Freiburg (OBO 125): 257-288.
Uhelenbrock, 1.P. 1993. Review of: 'Cypriote Terracottas'.
AJA 97/1: 175-176.
Ussishkin, D. 1977. The Destruction of Lachish by
Sennacherib and the Date of the Royal Judean
Storage Jars. Tel Aviv 4: 28-57.
Ussishkin, D. 1979. The Camp of the Assyrians in
Jerusalem. IEJ29: 137-142.
Ussishkin, D. 1982. The Conquest of Lachish by
Sennacherib. The Institute of Archaeology, Tel
Aviv University.
Ussishkin, D. 1983. Excavations at Tel Lachish 1978-1983:
Second Preliminary Report. TA 10/2.
Ussishkin, D. 1988. The Date of the Judean Shrine at Arad.
IE! 38: 142-157.
Ussishkin, D. 1989. The Assyrian Attack on Lachish: the
Evidence from the Southwest Comer of the City. EI
20: 97-114 (Hebrew. English ver. TA 17, 1990: 53-
86).
Ussishkin, D. 1993. Fresh Examination of Old Excavations:
Sanctuaries in the First Temple Period. in: Biran,
A. and Aviram ,1. eds. Biblical Archaeology Today
II. Jerusalem. Keter: 67-85.
Ussishkin, D. 1994. The Water System of Jerusalem during
Hezekiah's Reign. Cathedra 70: 3-28 (Hebrew).
Vafoloulou- Richardson, C.E. 1981. Greek Terracottas.
Oxford. The Ashmolean Museum.
Van der Kooij, G. and Ibrahim, M.M. 1989. Picking up the
Threads. Leiden. University of Leiden
Archaeological Centre.
Van der Toorn, K. 1986. Review of: Winter, U. 1983. "Frau
und Gottin. Bi.Or. 43: 439-499.
Van Loon, M. 1990. The Naked Rain Goddess. in:
Matthiae, P., Van-Loon, M. and Weiss, H. eds.
Resurrecting the Past. A Joint Tribute to Adnan
Bounni. Leiden. Nederlands Historisch -
Archaologisch Institut te Istanbul: 363-378.
132
Van Straten, F. 1992. Review of: Alroth, Brita 1989. "Greek
Gods and Figurines". Opuscula Atheniensa XIX:
194-195.
Van-Winkle, D.W. 1989. I Kings 13: True and False
Prophecy. VT39:31-43.
Vance, D.B. 1994. Literary Sources for the History of
Palestine and Syria: the Phoenician inscriptions,
Part Two. BA 57/2: 110-120.
Vandenabeele, Frieda 1986. Phoenician Influence on the
Cypro Archaic Terracotta Production and Cypriote
Influence Abroad. in: Karageorghis, V. ed. Acts of
the International Archaeological Symposium
"Cyprus between the Orient and the Occident"
1985. Nicosia: 351-360.
Vandenabeele, Frieda 1989. Has Phoenician influence
modified Cypriot Terracotta Production? in:
Peltenburg, E. ed. Early Society in Cyprus.
Edinbrgh. Edinburgh University: 266-271.
Vargon, Sh. 1994. The Book of Micha. Ramat Gan. Bar
IIlan University Press (Hebrew).
Vernieylen, 1. 1990. Review of: Hahn, 1. 1987. Das"
Goldene Kalb". Die Jahwe Verehrung bei
Stierbildern in das Geschichte Israels. Bonn. D.
Lang. Bi. Or. 47: 752-754.
Versnel, H. S. 1991. Some Reflections on the Relationship
Magic - Religion. Numen 38/2: 177-197.
Vincent, P. H. 1907. Canaan d'apres l'exploration r~cente.
Paris. 1. Gabalda.
Vincent, P.H. 1911. Underground Jerusalem. Discoveries
on the Hill ofOphel (1909-1911). London. H. Cox.
Voigt, Mary M. 1983. Hajji Firuz Tepe, Iran: The Neolithic
Settlement (Hasanlu Excavation Reports VoU).
Pennsylvania. The University Museum.
Von Beckerath, 1. 1992. ~gypten und der Feldzug
Sanheribs im Jahre 701 v.Chr. UF 24: 3-8.
Vorlander, H. 1986. Aspects of Popular Religion in the Old
Testament. in: Greinacher, N. and Mette, N. eds.
Popular Religion. Concilium T & T Clark.
Edinburgh:63-70.
Vrijhof, P. H. and Waardenburg, 1. eds. 1979. Official and
Popular Religion. Analysis of a Theme for
religious Studies. The Hague. Mouton
Publications.
Waldbaum, J.C. 1994. Early Greek Contacts with the
Southern Levant, Ca. 1000 - 600 BC: The Eastern
Perspective. BASOR 293: 53-66.
Walls, N.H. 1992. The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myth. SBL
Dissertation Series 135.
Wampler, J. C. 1941. Three Cistern" Groups from Tell en-
Nasbeh. BASOR 82: 25-43.
Ward, W.A 1994. Archaeology in Lebanon in the
Twentieth Century. BA 57/2: 66-85.
Watzinger, C. 1933. Denkmiiller Paldstinas. Eine
Einfiihrung in die Archaologie des Heiligen
Landes. Vol.I. Leipzig. 1. C. Heinrich.
Weber, M. 1922. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. English trans.
1965 by E. Fischoff. The Sociology of religion.
London. Meuthen.
Weinberg, S.S. 1971. Eretz-Israel after the Destruction of
the First Temple - An Archaeological Report.
Proceedings ofthe Israel Academy ofSciences and
Humanities IV. Jerusalem:202-216 (Hebrew).
Weinberg, S.S. 1978. A Moabite Shrine Group. MUSE 12:
30-49.
Weinfeld, M. 1972. Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic
School. Oxford. Clarendon Press.
Weinfeld, M. 1992. From Joshua to Joshia. Turning Points
in the History of Israel from the Conquest of the
Land until the Fall of Jerusalem. Jerusalem.
Magness (Hebrew).
Weippert, Helga 1988. Paldstina in vorhellenistischer Zeit.
MUnchen. C. H. Beck.
Weippert, Helga 1994. Zu Einer neuen ikonographischen
Religionsgeschichte Kanaans und Israel. Biblische
Zeitschrift 38/1: 1-28.
Weippet, M. 1987. The Relations of the States east of the
Jordan with the Mesopotamian Powers during the
first Millennium B.C. in: Hadidi, ed. SIHAJ III.
Amman: 97-106.
Weippert, M. and Helga 1976. Jericho in der Eisenzeit.
ZDPV 92: 105-148.
Welch, A.C. 1925. The Death of Joshiah. ZAW 43: 255-
260.
Wenning, R. 1989. Mesad IJashavyahu. Ein Stiitzpunkt des
Jojakim? in: Hossfeld, F.L. ed. Vom Sinai zum
Horeb. Wiirzburg. Echter Verlag: 169-196.
Wenning, R. 1991. Wer war der Paredos der Aschera?
Notizen zu Terrakottastatuetten in eizenzeitlischen
Graben. BN 59: 89-97.
Westermann, C. 1969. Isaiah. OTL. London. SCM Press.
Whitt, W. D. 1992. The Divorce of Yahweh and Asherah in
Hos. 2,4-7. 12ff. Scandinavian Journal of Old
Testament 6/1: 31-67.
Wiggermann, F.A.M. 1992. Mesopotamian Protective
Spirits. The Ritual Texts. Groningen. Styx.
Wiggins, S.A. 1991. The Myth of Asherah - Lion Lady and
Serpent Goddess. UF23: 383-394.
Wiggins, S.A. 1993. A Reassessment of 'Asherah'. A Study
According to the textual Sources of the First two
Millennia B.C.E. AOAT 235. Neukircher-Vluyn.
Wightman, G.D. 1985. Studies in the Stratigraphy and
Chronology of the Iron Age 2-3 in Palestine.
Doctoral Dissertation, Sydney University.
Wilford, 1.N. 1993. Long- Lost Field Notes Help Decode
Treasure. The New York Times, September 21,
1993: c1.
Williamson, H.G.M. 1982. 1 and 2 Chronicles. The New
Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids.
Eerdmans.
Williamson, H.G.M. 1982b. The Death of Joshia and the
continuing Developement of the Deuteronomistic
History. VT 32: 242-248.
Williamson, H.G.M. 1987. Reliving the Death of Joshia: a
Response to C.T. Begg. VT 37: 9-15.
Winter, U. 1983. Frau und Gdttin. Exegetische und
ikonographische Studien zum weiblichen
GOttesbild im Alten Israel und in dessen Umwelt.
Freiburg und Gottingen. Universitatsverlag (OBO
50).
133
Wiseman, D.1. 1956. Chronicles ofChaldaean Kings (626-
556 B. C.). London. British Museum Publications.
Wiseman, DJ. 1985. Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon. Oxford
(Schweich Lectures 1983). University Press.
Wood, B.G. 1990. The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient
Palestine. Sheffield (JSOT Suppl. Series 103).
Worschech, U. 1987. War Nebukadnezzar im Jahre 605
V.Chr. vor Jerusalem? BN 36: 57-63.
Worschech, U. 1989. Preliminary Report on the Second
Campaign at the Ancient Site of EI-BaIiic in 1987.
ADAJ 33: 111-121.
Worschech, U. 1990. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen in El
BaIu" 1987. ZDPV 106:86-111.
Worschech, U. 1990b. Die Beziehungen Moabs zu Israel
und Agypten in der Eisenzeit. Wiesbaden.
Harrassowitz.
Worschech, U. 1992. Pferd, Gottin und Stier. Funde zur
moabitischen Religion aus el-Balii' (Jordanien).
UF24: 383-391.
Wright, G. E. 1943. How did Early Israel differ from her
Neighbours. BA 6/1: 1-20.
Wright, G. E. 1957. Biblical Archaeology. Philadelphia
and London (2nd ed. 1962). Westminster Press.
Yadin, y. 1957. Excavations at Hazor, 1957. Preliminary
Report. IE! 8/1:1-14.
Yadin, Y. 1985. The Lachish Letters - Originals or Copies
and Drafts? EII8: 141-146.
Yadin, Y. and Geva, Sh. 1983. The Cities of the Negev
during Joshia's Days. Appendix 2 in: Hoffman, Y.
ed. Jeremiah. Encyclopedia of the Biblical World.
Jerusaelm:247-255.
Yassine, Kh. 1988. Tell el Mazar, Field I. Preliminary
Report of Area G, H, L and M: the Summit. in:
Archaeology of Jordan: Essays and Reports.
Amman. University ofJordan: 75-113.
Yeivin, S. 1961. First Preliminary Report on the Excavtions
at Tel "Gat". Jerusalem. Department. of
Antiquities.
Yisrael, ,M. 1959. 'Astarte' Plaques and Figurines in the
Israelite Period. Hedim 24 (61): 127-133. Repr.
1987, The Shephelah Museum, Kefar Menahem
(Hebrew).
Yon, Marguerite and Caubet, Annie 1988. Ateliers de
a
figurines Kition. in: Tatton-Brown, Veronica ed.
Cyprus and the Mediterranean World in the Iron
Age. London. The Trustees of the British Museum:
28-43.
Young, I. 1992. The Language of the Judicial Plea from
Mesad Hashavyahu. PEQ: 56-58.
Zadok, R. 1976. Geographical and Onomastical Notes.
JANES 8: 113-126.
Zawadzki, S. 1988. The Fall of Assyria and Median-
Babylonian Relations in Light ofthe Nabopolassar
Chronicle. Poznan. Adam Mickiewicz University
Press.
Zawadzki, S. 1995. A Contribution to the Chronology of
the Last days of the Assyrian Empire. Z4 W 85/1:
67-73.
Zayadine, F. 1973. Recent Excavations on the Citadel of
Amman. ADAJ 18: 17-75.
Zayadine, F. 1987. Die Zeit der Kdnigsreiche Edom, Moab
und Ammon. in: Mittmann, S. a.o. eds. Der
Kiinigsweg. 9000 Jahre Kunst und Kultur in
Jordanien. Koln. Von Zabern.
Zayadine, F. et.al. 1988. The 1988 Excavations on the
Citadel of Amman Lower Terrace, Area A. ADAJ
33: 357-363.
Zeeb, F. 1993. Review of: Wiggins, S.A. 1993. A
Reassessment of Asherah. UF 25: 512-515.
Zemer, A. 1991. Women's Hairstyles in Ancient Art. Haifa.
Museum of Ancient Art (Hebrew and English).
Zevit, Z. 1984. The Khirbet el K6m Inscription mentioning
a Goddess. BASOR 255: 39-48.
Zimansky, P. 1993. Scholars, Sailors and Peddlers of
134
Influence at Civilization's Edge. A Review. Journal of
Mediterranean Archaeology 6/2: 239-245.
Zimhoni, Orna 1985. The Iron Age Pottery ofTel'Eton and
its Relation to the Lachish, Tell Beit Mirsim and
Arad Assemblages. TA 12/1: 63-90.
Zimhoni, Orna 1990. Two Ceramic Assemblages from
Lachish Levels III and II. TA 17/1:3-52.
Zmirin, Sh. 1952. Joshia and his Period. (2nd. ed. 1977)
Jerusalem. Bialik Institute (Hebrew).
Zori, N. 1958. Cult Figurines in the Eastern plain of
Esdraelon and Beth Shean. El5:52-54 (Hebrew).
Zorn, J.R. 1993. Tell en-Nasbeh: A Re-evaluation of the
Architecture and Stratigraphy of the early Bronze
Age, Iron Age and later Periods. Ph.D Thesis.
University of California, Berkeley.
Appendixes and Keys
"Beware, Sir, of acquiring the habit of reading catalogues; you will never get any good from it, and it will consume
much of your time" (M. Routh, quoted in: J. Morris. 1978. The Oxford Book of Oxford. Oxford: 236).
Introduction to Appendixes 1-2
I have arranged in appendix 1 data about 578
figUrines, defined as Judean pillar-figurines (JPF for
short). Many of these figurines were not yet published.
The data was processed with Paradox Windows, and a
basic table format is printed as app. 1, arranged by an
alphabetical order of sites. The database was queried
and analyzed, and the results are discussed in the
textual part of this book. I have not printed the results
of each query for lack of space. The data in app. 1 is
coded, and each figurines is presented in one row
which continues along three printed pages (the second
and third pages are numbered with the letters a, b,
respectively). In order to enable an easy reference, the
first column in each page is the catalogue number of
the figurines. The codes used in appendix 1, as well as
other details of structure, are explained in the keys
preceding it (below).
Appendix 2 is a complete catalogue of all 854 JPF,
arranged by catalogue numbers. This is an 'identity
number' for each figurine, often used in the text for
references to specific figurines. Appendix 2 includes a
large addenda of figurines that were brought to my
attention too late to be included in appendix 1 (nos.
579-854). More JPF are currently known to me, mostly
from recent excavations. There are also some JPF that
I was not allowed to include in this work.
The data in appendix 2 is textual. There is a detailed
discussion of each figurine, i.e., a general description
and definition (with details about exceptional features),
followed by the stratigraphy, context and date. Then
there are miscellaneous notes and a full bibliography.
The discussion of published JPF is often shorter than
that of unpublished, new figurines, since I saw no need
to repeat all the technical details which are found in the
earlier publications. Regarding dating, the site levels
are usually given, since their stratigrapy and date were
already explained in chapter 1.3 (above). A few
figurines of doubtful definition appear in notes, or
numbered by small letters. These dubtful cases are not
included in the catalogue numbers.
Appendix 2 is arranged by arbitrary catalogue
numbers, but with the help of Appendix 1 and the
different keys, a specific figurine can be easily located
according to type, site, and the main former typologies
(of Holland and Engle).
The preparation of Appendixes 1-2 was a demanding
task, which necessitated to cope with old publications.
Thise often left much to be desired; the photographs
135
and drawings, if these exist at all, are often of low
quality. It is frustrating to try to identify three-
dimensional objects by such media, and cases of doubt
regarding exact classification remain. Spelling
mistakes and misleading data occur. Thus, it happened
that one figurines was published twice, without cross-
references between the different publications; or that
figurines were "forgotten" after being published in
obscure preliminary publications (e.g., JPF nos. 106-
108, 281-286). I have therefore consulted any
publlcanon, even the very preliminary ones, and
checked personally any figurine that could be seen in
institutions and museums in Israel. Often, JPF
assemblages found in early excavations were only
partially published, and the rest was discarded or lost.
Usually we cannot define the typoloqy, context, date,
etc. of these lost figurines. The report of Tel en-
Nasbeh is an exception, in giving more accurate
details than usual (TN I: app. A). Dr. G. Zorn kindly
helped me with a list of figurines from this site,
prepared according to the excavators' records in
Berkeley. Even though, there can be no substitute to
personal eyesight.
In my typology I used codes, which are necessary for
the computing process and for easy references. Other
scholars would have probably invented somewhat
different codes, or structured their data-base
differently. I tried to be coherent and to present the
simplest method of codes, while keeping a possibility
to add new figurines in the future without breaking the
whole structure of the data-base. Still, every typology
is an imosition; we impose a modern typology on
ancient artifacts which were created individually, and
were not products of a mechanized industry (despite
being schematic or conventionalized).
The first process of work was to make a detailed card
(textual and graphic) for each JPF and other Iron Age
anthropomorphic figurines. Holland's thesis (1975)
served as a natural starting point for that purpose.
Then, data was checked and compared with the
publications. The dating and the contexts were studied
carefully, without taking for granted the opinions
expresses in each publication. This had to be done for
hundreds of items, each concerning many different
details. In a careful estimation, appendix 1 alone
includes some 20,000 data entries. With such quantity
of words and numbers, some mistakes are bound to
happen. I hope that these are few, and negligible in
regard to the general picture presented in this work.
 Key 1: The Fields of Appendix 1
The fields are presented by their order of appearance
in the appendix. For an explanation of the codes used
within each fields see key 2 below. The field name is
given in bold italics.
CAT (catalogue number). An ascending number (1-
578), defining each JPF. The order is arbitrary, since
the data on the JPF was registered and processed
during different months within the years 1992-1994.
The catalogue number is repeated also in the first (left)
column of pages a and b of the appendix.
T1, T2, T3 (type). These three fields denote, as a
combination, the main type of each figurines, sorted
primarily by head features. T1 defines the type of head
or body (A, B or C), T2 and T3 define further sub-
features such as shape of the hair or applied parts.
Locks (side-locks). A definition of the side-locks of the
moulded heads (type B). The hand-made heads (type
A) are much more schematic, and this field was usually
not used for them.
The following fields define secondary characteristics of
the figurines. SL - white-wash or slip. CL - details of
colors of painted decorations. B - evidence for burning
or blackening by fire. Break - main breakage patterns.
Hh - height of heads in millimeters. For hand-made
heads, it is measured from the lower point of the nose
to the highest point of the head; for moulded heads, it
is the face only, measured from the lowest point of the
chin until the beginning of the hairdress. Hal - general
height of figurine or fragment, in millimeters. The
heights in fields Hh and Hal were often calculated from
photographs and drawings, for lack of direct access to
the figurines. These calculations may not be fully
accurate.
Site The names of the sites. Names are given in the
fullest possible form, usually following the common
(not scientific) English transcription. The word Tel was
used consistently, also for Arabic names (instead of
Tell), in order to help searching the sites alphabetically.
For Jerusalem, where the number of figurines is very
large, the first letters of the excavators' names have
been added to this field.
All the following fields define the location of a figurine
in the site, and are fairly straightforward. Fld (field) -
area of excavations in a site. Squar (square) - square
in a dig. Lev and then Locus - the locus and the level
in the excavation. Usually, I followed the original form
of registration in these field. Sometimes, I had to
shorten Roman numerals to Arabic ones, or give only
part of the definition of areas and squares, when these
form long alphanumeric combinations.
Date appears on "b" pages of app. 1 and defines dates
in hundreds of years BC (cf. also chap. I of this work).
136
Context1 and Cont2 are two field used to define the Key 2: Codes to Appendix 1
context. The first field includes a short verbal
description of the context, without codes (but with a
shortening long names by quoting only the first letters).
Field T1 - Main Type F hexagonal curls (Holland AVILa)
The second field (cont2) is a more general definition of
context (public, private, etc.), using codes. Question A hand-made head G combination I other forms (Holland A.VII.b-c)
marks after the codes indicate cases of doubt. When a
A+ hand-made head with part of body
general definition is not possible, the main data of field
context1 is repeated in field cont2. Ac whole hand-made figurine Field T2 for C Type Bodies
B moulded head 1 whole body (Holland AXa-b)
Holland is a field combined of four sub-fields,
referring together to the JPF in Holland's unpublished B+ moulded head with part of body 2 upper part (chest)
doctoral dissertation (1975). It enables us to locate
Be whole moulded figurine 3 base or lower part
specific figurines in comparison with his typological
scheme. Be moulded head and hollow, wheel-made body ? unclear part of body
Engle is a field which refers to the dissertation of C solid "pillar" body
Engle (1979). In the last two fields the Roman E hollow, wheel-made "pillar" body
numerals in the origin are substituted for the shorter
Field T3 for C Type Bodies
Arabic form (e.g., 4.7 instead of IV.7).
Field T2 for Hand-made Heads Classification by the position of the hands:
Field Reg., Museum Reg. show the registration
A1 simple rounded head (Holland A.La) A hands supporting the breasts, or placed a little
numbers in the field or in a museum. In some cases,
other registration numbers are given, notably that of A2 with band or "turban" (Holland ALb) beneath them (Holland's types AX.a-b)
the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA). Usually, the
A3 with band and side-locks (Holland ALe) B the same position as A above, but the hands do not
institutions are specified by letters preceding the
numbers (for details see key 3 below). A4 with applied conical hat (Holland ALd) meet each other
A5 with applied hat and side-locks (Holland ALe) C hands uplifted (one or both)
Lfind (find in locus) is a field used to define different
finds from loci, where JPF have been also found. A6 other (Holland A.Lf) D hands holding a disk, or another object
Fgrp (groups of finds) specifies groups of figurines
found in the same loci together with JPF. For lack of
space, the registration in both these fields had to be Field T3 for Hand-made Heads
very short and was quite preliminary.
A simple depressions for eyes Field LOCKS for Hand-made Heads
Place The place of a figurine currently (1995), Le., the B-E other types, not JPF (not included in app. 1-2) This field is used to give details of painted decoration
name of the institution where it is displayed or stored.
(and not of side-locks), classified by numbers:
The data is coded, as is detailed in key 3 below.
Field T2 for Moulded Heads 1 necklace
Prs (preservation state). Since it is not always easy to
Classification by number of rows of curls above the 2 bracelets
judge the preservation state of a figurine by
photographs or drawing, the data cannot be fUlly forehead: 1 to 6 rows (0 in case of "linear" ridges 3 both 1 and 2
accurate. The definition pertains only to the part that
without curls). 4 indication of fingers
remained (l.e., a small fragment may still be judged to
be in a good shape, while a whole figurine may be SRT- one band or ridge without rows of curls 5 other
worn out and badly preserved).
Other- exceptional types of hairdress
Pc (personal check). All the _figUrines checked Field LOCKS for Moulded Heads
personally by the author, a total of 123 or about a fifth
Field T3 for Moulded Heads Classification in three parts:
of all the corpus (excluding the addenda). One has to
remember that many figurines were discarded, lost, or Classification by shape of curls: 1. Number of curls in each lock.
deposited in dozens of institutions all over the world.
A rounded (Holland All) 2. Shape of the curls (codes as in field T3 above).
Bibliography A reference is given, usually only one, B square (Holland Alii) 3. Number of columns of curls in each lock.
to the first publication of the figurine or to the most Differences between the two side-locks in the same
C vertical (Holland A.IV)
important one (usually the final excavation report). All
the references conform with the general bibliographical D wedge shaped (Holland A.V) head are usually not registered.
list, except very few cases of marginal references
E without curls (Holland "linear", A.VI) SIMP- simple side-locks without curls
which are presented in a shortened form.
137
Other- heads without side-locks, or too worn to be Fields Lev, Fld, Squar, Locus MIX mixed or disturbed locus I incense stands
classified exactly. No codes are used, but often the data is shortened for OUT outside the settlement area or walls, possibly J jewelry
lack of space (e.g., 1R2 instead of Iron Age II period). connected with cemetries or extra-mural L Imlk seal impressions
Field SL (Slip) quarters. M models of furniture
+ white-wash, or remains of it. Field OAT (Date) PRES olive press or wine press R clay rattles
R red slip Hundreds of years BC: POOL S standing stones
empty- no white-wash, or data not available. 10, 9, 8 - until 701 BC PUBL public W inscribed limestone weights
7- from 700 to 586 BC ROOM
6- after 586 BC SAC sacred context Field Fgrp (Figurines in Locus)
Field CL (color) IR2 - all Iron Age II until 586 BC SILO A,B,C JPF types
1 red MIX - mixed locus (unclear date) animal figurines. When possible, the number
STAB tripartite storehouse (the so-called stable) AN
2 yellow ?- doubtful dating STOR other kind of storehouse of figurines per locus is indicated
3 black
SURF surface find o horse and rider
4 brown Field Context1 TAB oven (tabun) DV dove, or bird - figurines
5 white Usually textual descriptions. Some abbreviations of TOWR tower H horses (and riders) figurines
6 red and yellow writing are used, and a few codes (which are the same TFND foundation trench + figurines of unclear types
7 red and black as those used in field Cont.2 (below). TROB robbery trench
8 other TEMP temple Field Place
Field Cont.2 (context2) WALL inside walls, or on walls Places of figurines today. See codes in key 3 (below).
Field BREAK (Breakage Patterns) ALLY narrow passage, usually between domestic WELL
1 broken neck, more or less at its middle houses WSYS water system, including the shaft Field Prs (Preservation State)
1d neck broken at lower end BALK earth balk in an excavation B Bad. Large parts broken away or worn; facial
1u neck broken at upper end BUR burial and hair-dress features not clear, no remains
Field Museum. Reg.
1p the head left with a whole peg, or neck broken and CASM casemate room in a wall IAA Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem of paint (and usually of the white-wash as well).
peg visible in the cut. In C.1-2 bodies - depression CAVE BM British Museum, London F Fair. Medium breaks and fractures. Traces of
for a peg visible at the upper edge of the body. CIST water cistern PM, P, I Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem white-wash and often of paint. Main facial and
2 armIs broken near shoulders CORT court in I near house 1M Israel Museum, Jerusalem hair-dress features are clear.
3 armIs broken near breasts DEBR earth debris G Good. Minor damages and breaks. Remains of
J Jordan Museum, Amman
4 broken I damaged breasts DEST destruction layer JM Jewish Museum, New York the paint are usually visible.
5 body broken between breasts and base DOM domestic context WM Weingreen Museum, Dublin E Excellent. No real damage; small details of the
6 parts of base broken FAV favissa face and the hair-dress are well preserved.
7 broken nose FIL fill Field Lfnd (Finds in Locus)
8 other head damages. FLR on I in a floor Field Pc (Personal Check)
P domestic pottery
FORT fortress F weapons + figurine seen personally
Field SITE GATE (inclUding outer gates)
App. 1 is arranged by an alphabetic order of sites. The GLAC glacis (including ramp)
names are common, and not exact transliterations GRAVE
from the Arabic or Hebrew names. For convenience HOUS house
sake, the form ''Tel'' is used (also for Arabic names). INST installation
See list of sites in key 4 (below). L1V living layer (finds in I on the floor)

138 139
 Key 3: Places of JPF Key 4: List of Sites
Code (app. 1) Place The following alphabetical list includes sites where JPF have been found (in bold letters, cf. app. 1-2 below). The
1 Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem sites in italics appear in appendixes 4-5. Transjordanian sites are given in regular script (but a few appear in app,
2 Israel Antiauities Authority Stores at Romema, Jerusalem
3 Same as no. 2, but on loan to another institution or museum 5 as well). The spelling usually follows the conventional English forms, and is not an accurate scientific
4 Eretz Israel Museum, Ramat Aviv, Tel Aviv transliteration. The form "Tel" is used for both Hebrew and Arabic names (sites mentioned in the text are indexed
5 Israel Museum, Jerusalem
6 The Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem at the end of the volume). A total of 118 sites are listed below.
7 The Institute of Archaeoloav, Tel Aviv University Abu Ghosh Gile'am (near Kfar Ata) Mevaseret Jerusalem Tel el-'Umeiri
8 Yad Meir, Israel
9 Achzib Hazor (Moza) Tel en-Nasbeh
The Institute of Archaeology, Ben-Gurion University, Beer Sheba
10 Bar lIIan University, Ramat Gan Afulah Heshbon Na'ur Tel er-Rumeit
11 The British Museum, London
Amman (Rabat Ammon) Irbid Nebo Tel Erani see: Tel el-
12 The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia USA
13 The Metropolitan Museum, New York Arad Jalul (Moab) Pella Areini
14 The Jewish Museum, New York Aroer Jawa see: Tel Jawa RamatRahel Tel es-Safi
15 Roval Ontario Museum, Toronto
16 Kansas City, Michiaan USA Ashdod Jerusalem Ramot Tel es-Sa'idiyeh
17 Otago Museum, Dunedin, New Zealand Ashke/on Jericho Sahab Tel ez-Zuweid
18 Ashmolean Museum, Oxford
19 The Hunterian Museum, Glasgow Azeka Kabri Samaria (Shomeron) Tel Gemmeh
20 Universitv of Sheffield, Sheffield, England Azor Kerak (Moab) Shechem Tel Gerishe (Grisa)
21 University of S1. Andrews
22 University of Sydney, Australia Beer Sheba see Tel Beer Kh.Anim Shiqmona Tel Halif (Lahav)
23 The Riikmuseum, Leiden Sheba Kh. Ayun Musa (near Ta'anakh Tel Hadar
24 London University (Departmemt of Semitic Studies)
25 The National Jordanian Museum, Amman Beit Saida (East of sea of Nebo) Tawilan Tel Harasim
26 Leeds University (Department of Semitic Studies) Galilee) Kh. el-Balu' Tel Abu Hawwam Tel Haror
27 Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery, Birmingham
28 M.C. Carlos Museum, Emory University, Georaia USA Beth Lehem Kh. el-Medeineh Tel Amal (Nir David) Tel Ira
29 The Oriental Museum, Durham Beth Shean Kh. el- Meshed (near Tel Aphek (Sharon) Tel Jawa
30 Weinareen Museum of Biblical Antiquities, Trinity Colleae, Dublin
31 Beth Shemesh Nebo) Tel Asor Tel Keisan
Australian Institute of Archaeolouv, Melbourne, Australia
32 Ecole Biblique, Jerusalem Bethel Kh. er-Rujm see: Gile'am Tel Batash (Timnah) Tel Masad
33 Southern Baptist Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky
Buseirah Kh. Geresh Tel Beer Sheba Tel Masos
34 Berkeley University (Bade Institute), Berkeley USA
35 Pittsburgh Xenia Museum, USA Debir see: Kh. Rabud Kh.Hoga Tel Beit Mirsim Tel Megadim
36 Haverford Museum, Pennsylvania USA
Dalhamiya Kh. Rabud (Debir) Tel Deir 'Alia Tel Michal
37 The Prime Minister's Office, Jerusalem
99 Discarded after Excavation Dan Kh. Sit Laila Tel ej-Judeideh Tel Qasilah
Dibon (Dhiban) Kinneret see: Tel el- Tel el-Ajjul Tel Qitaf
Notes: a few of the above mentioned departments or institutions no longer exist, and the
locations of their figurines are not clear. Other institutions may have been renamed. Dor 'Oremeh Tel el-Areini (Tel Erani) Tel Shera
Ein Genin Lachish Tel el- Far'ah (north) Tel Zakariya see: Azeka
Ekron Lahav see: Tel Halif Tel e/- Far'ah (south) Tel Yeno'am (Galilee)
Gat (Sharon Plain), cf Kh. Ma'alul (near Nazareth) Tel el-Ful Tel Yosef
Sit Laila Machmish (Michmash) Tel el-Hesi Tel Zeror
Gebel Joffa (Amman) Malhata Tel el-Mazar Vered Jericho
Gebel Qal'ah (Amman) Maresha Tel el-Muleiha
Gezer Mefalsim Tel el- 'Oremeh
Gibeon Megiddo (Kinnerot)

140 141
 Key 5: The Classification of Holland
Legend: read from left to right. Holland- the classification of Holland (1975). Cat- my catalogue number.
T1-T2-T3- my main types. Engle- the type as classified by Engle (1979)

H 01 la nd Cat T1 T2 T3 Engle
H 01 la nd Cat T1 T2 T3 Engle H 01 la nd Cat T1 T2 T3 Engle H 01 la nd Cat T1 T2 T3 Engle
A 1 A 58 129 A 1 A
A 1 A 01 2A 1 A A 1 A 59 130 A 1 A A 2 C 05 56 8 1-2 A 5:203 A 3 F 03 89 8 3 8 1:33
A 1 A 02 252 Ae 1 Ah A 1 A 60 126 Ae 1 A A 2 C 06 289 8 1-2 A 7:32 A 4A 01 187 8 1 C 5:03
A 1 A 03 14 A 1 A A 1 A 61 125 Ae 1 AD A 2 C 07 203 8 2 A 7:11 A 4A 02 189 B 1 C 5:04
A 1 A 04 8 Ae 1 A A 1 A 62 116 A? 1 A A 2 C 08 204 8 1-2 A 5:204 A 4 A 03 70 8 1 C 7:20
A 1 A 05 9 A+ 1 A A 1 A 63 181 A+ 1 A A 2 C 09 198 8e 2 A 7:14 A 4A 04 235 8 1 C 7:03
A 1 A 06 10 A+ 1 Ah A 1 8 02 362 A 2 A A 2 C 10 149 8 1-2 A 5:01 A 4A 05 76 Be 1 C 2:03
A 1 A 06a 184 Ae 1 A A 1 8 03 332 A 2 A A 2 C 11 148 8 2 A 5:103 A 4 A 06 158 8 1 C 5:02
A 1 A 07 40 A 1 A A 1 8 04 363 A 2 A A 2 C 12 579 8 2? 7:23 A 4 B 02 209 8 2 C 7:21
A 1 A 08 43 A 1 AD A 1 8 05 364 A 2 A A 2 C 13 337 8 1? A 4 8 03 208 B 2 C 3:10
A 1 A 09 44 A 1 An A 1 8 06 365 A 2 A A 2 0 02 151 8 2-3 A 5:102 A 4 8 05 162 8 3 C 7:18
A 1 A 10 45 A+ 1 A A 1 8 06a 433 A 2 A A 2 0 03 150 8 2-3 A 5:101 A 4 8 4 160 8 2 C 7:19
A 1 A 11 46 A 1 An A 1 8 07 131 A 2 Ap A 2 0 04 152 8 2-3 A 7:39 A 4 C 01 210 8 2 A 5:202
A 1 A 12 47 A 1 AD A 1 8 09 117 A 2 A A 2 E 01 23 8 2 A 7:06 A 4 0 01 374 8 3 C 3:03
A 1 A 13 48 A 1 An A 1 C 01 333 A 3 A A 2 E 04 36 8e 2-3 A 1:34 A 4 0 02 376 8 3? C 3:01
A 1 A 14 49 A 1 AD A 1 C 02 334 A+ 3 A A 2 E 05 57 8 8:24 A 4 0 03 375 8 3 C 3:02
A 1 A 15 50 A 1 AD A 1 C 03 335 A 3 A A 2 E 06 199 8+ 2 A 4:08 A 4 0 04 90 8 3 C 3:07
A 1 A 16 42 A+ 1 A A 1 C 04 336 A 3 A A 2 F 02 58 8 3 A 4:03 A 4 0 05 91 B 3? C 5:108
A 1 A 16a 68 A 1 An A 1 C 04a 435 A 3 A A 2 F 03 120 8 3 A 4:05 A 4 E 03 93 8 1 C 8:07
A 1 A 17 338 A+ 1 A A 1 C 05 133 A 3 A A 2 G 01 19 8 3? 1:25 A 4 E 05 161 8 2 C 8:09
A 1 A 18 339 A 1 AD A 1 C 06 136 A 3 A A 2 G 02 86 8 3 A 8:08 A 4 E 06 164 8 2 8 5:104
A 1 A 19 340 A 1 An A 1 C 07 134 A 3 A A 2 H 01 20 8+ 4 A 7:31 A 4 E 07 163 B 3 8 7:24
A 1 A 20 341 A 1 A A 1 C 08 135 A 3 A A 2 H 02 185 8 3 A 3:05 A 5 A 01 37 8 3 0 1:29
A 1 A 21 342 A 1 A A 1 C 09 128 A 3 A A 2 H 03 59 8 4 A 4:06 A 5 8 01 79 8e 3 B 6:08
A 1 A 22 343 A 1 A A 1 C 09a 138 A 3 A A 2 H 04 296 8 4 A 1:03 A 5 8 02 92 B 3 0 6:07
A 1 A 23 344 A 1 A A 1 0 01 51 A 4 A A 2 H 05 200 8+ 3-4 A 7:28 A 5 C 01 73 8 5 0 6:02
A 1 A 24 345 A 1 A A 1 0 02 52 A 4 A A 2 H 06 205 8 3-5 A 1:10 A 5 C 02 94 8 4 0 6:01
A 1 A 25 346 A 1 A A 1 0 03 369 A 4 A A 21 01 21 8 1 A 7:05 A 6 A 02 3n 8 1-2 4:07
A 1 A 26 347 A 1 A A 1 0 04 366 A 4 A A 3 A 01 186 8 2 8 4:04 A 6 8 01 279 B 2? E 7:33
A 1 A 27 348 A 1 A A 1 0 05 137 A 2 A A 3 A 02 39 8 2 8 7:02 A 6 0 01 278 8 4 E? 7:34
A 1 A 28 349 A 1 A A 1 0 06 140 A 4 A A 3 8 01 22 8 3 8 8:23 A 6 E 01 72 8 3? E 1:19
A 1 A 29 350 A 1 A A 1 E 01 367 A 5 A A 3 8 02 371 8 3 8 1:15 A 6 E 02 378 8 5 E 1:14
A 1 A 30 351 A 1 A A 1 E 02 368 A 5 A A 3 8 03 372 8 3 8 5:106 A 7 A 01 rr 8e 3-4 F 3:08
A 1 A 31 322 A 1 A A 1 F 01 53 A 6 A A 3 C 01? 7 8e 3 8 2:07 A 78 01 78 8e 2 G 3:11
A 1 A 32 321 A 1 A A 1 G 01 359 A+ 1 A A 3 C 02 13 8e 3 8 2:02 A 7 8 02 212 8 2 G 3:09
A 1 A 33 320 A 1 A A 1 G 02 360 C 1 D? A 3 C 03 15 8 3 8 2:01 A 7 8 03 211 8 2 G 7:13
A 1 A 34 319 A 1 An A 1 G 03 361 C 1 0 A 3 C 04 300 8 3 8 1:17 A 7 C 01 294 8 2 G 7:41
A 1 A 35 318 A 1 AD A 1 G 04 179 C 2 0 A 3 C 05 201 8 3 8 1:27 A 8 A 01 75 8e 7:26
A 1 A 36 323 A 1 A A 1 G 05 118 A+ 1 AD A 3 C 06 153 8 3 8 1:24 A 8 A 02 213 8 OT 7:10
A 1 A 37 324 A 1 An A 1 H 02 232 Ae 1 A A 3 0 01? 263 8 3-4 6:05 A 8 A 03 105 B 0 7:35
A 1 A 38 325 A 1 AD A 1 J 08 139 A 4 CD A 3 0 02 25 8 4 8 1:37 A 8 8 01 292 8 O? 7:38
A 1 A 39 326 A 1 An A 1 J 09 127 A+ 1 C A 3 0 03 11 8e 4 8 1:01 A 8 C 01 1 8e 7:27
A 1 A 40 327 A 1 An A 1 J 12 119 Ae 1 C A 3 0 04 24 8 4 8 1:38 A 9 A 01 168 8 sr? 7:43
A 1 A 41 352 A 1 A A 2 A 01 16 8 3 A 7:29 A 3 0 04a 26 8 4 8 1:11 A 9 A 02 165 B srt 7:45
A 1 A 42 353 A 1 A A 2 A 02 54 8 3 A 1:39 A 3 0 05 38 8 4 8 1:28 A 9 C 01 167 8 1 8 5:07
A 1 A 43 354 A 1 A A 2 A 03 370 8 3 A 3:04 A 3 0 06 373 8 4 8 1:18 A 9 0 01 166 8 5 A 7:44
A 1 A 44 355 A 1 A A 2 A 04 307 8 3 A 1:09 A 3 0 07 301 8 4 8 1:16 A 10 A 03 63 C 1
A 1 A 45 356 A 1 A A 2 A 05 308 8e 2 A 1:36 A 3 0 08 291 8 4 8 1:26 A 10 A 04 380 C 2
A 1 A 46 357 A 1 A A 2 A 06 84 8 3 A 3:12 A 3 0 09 295 8 4 8 1:02 A 10 A 05 381 C 1
A 1 A 47 358 A 1 A A 2 A 07 83 8 3 A 5:107 A 3 0 10 233 8 3-4 8 1:30 A 10 A 10 178 C 2
A 1 A 48 328 A 1 A A 2 A 08 141 8 3 A 5:06 A 3 0 11 85 8 4 8 2:06 A 10 A 12 293 C 2
A 1 A 49 329 A 1 A A 2 A 09 142 8 3 A 5:05 A 3 0 12 88 8 4 8 1:13 A 10 8 01? 6 C? 2
A 1 A 50 330 A 1 A A 2 A 10 145 B 3 A 7:16 A 3 0 13 87 8 4 8 1:12 A 10 8 02 32 C 1
A 1 A 51 287 Ae 1 An A 2 A 11 144 8 2 A 7:47 A 3 0 14 102 8 4 8 1:35 A 10 8 03 31 C 1
A 1 A 52 331 A 1 A A 2 A 12 159 8 2 A 3:13 A 3 0 15 206 8 4 8 7:12 A 10 8 04 29 C 1
A 1 A 53 436 A 1 A A 2 A 13 146 8 3 A 7:17 A 3 0 16 207 8 4 8 6:03 A 10 8 05 30 C 1
A 1 A 53a 434 A 1 A A 2 A 14 121 B 3 A 5:08 A 3 0 17 155 8 4 8 1:20 A 10 8 06 33 C 1
A 1 A 54 81 Ae 1 A A 2 8 01 202 8 4 A 6:04 A 3 0 18 154 8 4 8 1:22 A 10 8 07 41 C 1
A 1 A 55 82 Ae 1 A A 2 C 01 442 8 2 A 5:105 A 3 0 19 156 8 4 8 1:23 A 10 8 08 62 C 1
A 1 A 56 80 Ae 1 An A 2 C 02 17 8 1-2 A 7:30 A 3 0 20 157 8 4 8 1:21 A 10 8 09 67 C 2
A 1 A 56a 95 A 1 A A 2 C 03 18 B 1-2 A 7:25 A 3 E 01 197 8e 1 8 4:01 A 10 8 10 64 C 2
A 1 A 57 196 A+ 1? A? A 2 C 04 55 8 1-2 A A 3 F 01 188 8 3 8 1:08 A 10 8 11 65 C 2
5:201
A 3 F 02 234 8 3 8 7:07 A 10 8 12 66 C 2

142 143
 Key 6: The Classification of Engle
Legend: read from left to right. Engle- the type as classified by Engle (1979). Cat-my catalogue number.
Holland- the classification of Holland (1975).

Engle Cat H 01 la nd Engle Cat H 01 la nd

H 01 la nd Cat T1 T2 T3 Engle H 01 Ie nd Cat T1 T2 T3 Engle 1:01 11 A 3 D 03 3:09 212 A 7 B 02
A 10 B 13 61 C 1 A 10 C 06 412 C 2 1:02 295 A 3 D 09 3:10 208 A 4 B 03
A 10 B 14 382 C 2 A 10 C 07 413 C 2 1:03 296 A 2 H 04 3:11 78 A 7 B 01
A 10 B 15 383 C 2 A 10 C 08 414 C 2 1:04 260
A 10 B 16 384 C 2 A 10 C 09 297 C 1 C 3:12 84 A 2 A 06
A 10 B 17 385 C 2 A 10 C 1:05 74 3:13 159 A 2 A 12
10 175 C 2
A 10 B 18 386 C 2 A 10 C 11 173 C 2 1:07 109 3:14 267
A 10 B 19 387 C 2 A 10 I 02 303 C 1 E 1:08 188 A 3 F 01 3:15 261
A 10 B 20 388 C 2 A 11 02? 3 C? 1:09 307 A 2 A 04 4:01 197 A 3 E 01
A 10 B 21 389 C 1 A 11 04? 4 C? 1:10 205 A 2 H 06 4:02 97
A 10 B 22 390 C 1 A 11 05? 5 C? 1:11 26 A 3 D 04a 4:03 58 A 2 F 02
A 10 B 23 379 C 1 A 11 08 35 C 1:12 87 A 3 D 13 3 01
A 10 B 24 391 C 1 4:04 186 A A
A 11 10 190 C 3 1:13 88 A 3 D 12 03
A 10 B 25 392 C 2 A 11 17 415 C 3
4:05 120 A 2 F
A 10 B 26 393 C 2 1:14 378 A 6 E 02 4:06 59 A 2 H 03
A 11 19 416 C 2
A 10 B 27 394 C 2 A 11 20 417 C 2 1:15 371 A 3 B 02 4:07 377 A 6 A 02
A 10 B 28 395 C 2 A 11 21 418 C 2 1:16 301 A 3 D 07 4:08 199 A 2 E 06
A 10 B 29 396 C 1 A 11 22 419 C 2 1:17 300 A 3 C 04 4:09 124
A 10 B 30 397 C 2 A 11 23 420 C 2 1:18 373 A 3 D 06 5:01 149 A 2 C 10
A 10 B 31 398 C 1 A 11 24 421 C 2 1:19 72 A 6 E 01 5:02 158 A 4 A 06
A 10 B 32 399 C 1 A 11 25 422 C 2 1:20 155 A 3 D 17 5:03 187 A 4 A 01
A 10 B 33 401 C 2 A 11 26 423 C 2 1:21 157 A 3 D 20
A 10 B 34 402 C 1 5:04 189 A 4 A 02
A 11 27 424 C 2 1:22 154 A 3 0 18
A 10 B 35 400 C 2 A 11 28 425 C 3 5:05 142 A 2 A 09
A 10 B 36 403 C 2? A 11 29 426 C 3 1:23 156 A 3 0 19 5:06 141 A 2 A 08
A 10 B 37 404 C A 11 30 427 C 3 1:24 153 A 3 C 06 5:07 167 A 9 C 01
A 10 B 38 405 C ? A 11 31 428 C 3 1:25 19 A 2 G 01 5:08 121 A 2 A 14
A 10 B 39 406 C ? A 11 32 429 C 2 1:26 291 A 3 D 08 5:101 150 A 2 D 03
A 10 B 40 407 C ? A 11 33 430 C? ? 1:27 201 A 3 C 05 5:102 151 A 2 D 02
A 10 B 41 304 C 1 A 11 34 431 C? ? 1:28 38 A 3 D 05 5:103 148 A 2 C 11
A 10 B 42 408 C 2 A 11 35 314 C? 2 1:29 37 A 5 A 01 164 4 06
A 10 B 43 305 C 2 5:104 A E
A 11 36 313 C? 2 1:30 233 A 3 D 10
A 10 B 44 288 C 2 A 11 5:105 442 A 2 C 01
37 312 C? 2 1:31 28
A 10 B 45 298 C 2 A 11 38 306 C 1 5:106 372 A 3 B 03
A 10 B 46 237 C 1 A 11 39 315 C 3 1:32 27 5:107 83 A 2 A 07
A 10 B 47 96 C 2 A 11 40 317 C 3 1:33 89 A 3 F 03 5:108 91 A 4 D 05
A 10 B 49 228 C 2 A 11 41 316 C 3 1:34 36 A 2 E 04 5:201 55 A 2 C 04
A 10 B 50 224 C 2 A 11 42 290 C 1 1:35 102 A 3 0 14 5:202 210 A 4 C 01
A 10 B 51 214 C 1 A 11 43 299 C 3 1:36 308 A 2 A 05 5:203 56 A 2 C 05
A 10 B 52 229 C 2 A 11 44 432 C? ? 1:37 25 A 3 D 02 5:204 204 A 2 C 08
A 10 B 53 223 C 2 A 11 44a 104 C 1 1:38 24 A 3 D 04
A 10 B 54 225 C 2 5:205 219 A 12 R 05
A 11 47 231 C 3 1:39 54 A 2 A 02
A 10 B 55 216 C 1 A 11 48 226 6:01 94 A 5 C 02
C 2 2:01 15 3
A 10 B 56 217 C 1 C A 11 54 180 C ? A C 03 6:02 73 A 5 C 01
A 10 B 57 218 C 1 A 11 55 170 C 3 2:02 13 A 3 C 02 6:03 207 A 3 D 16
A 10 B 58 221 C 2 A 12 B 01 236 B 4? A? 7:08 2:03 76 A 4 A 05 6:04 202 A 2 B 01
A 10 B 59 215 C 1 A 12 R 01 60 B 7:15 2:04 99 6:05 263 A 3 D 01?
A 10 B 60 220 C 1 A 12 R 04 302 B 2:05 262 6:07 92 A 5 B 02
A 10 B 61 230 C? 2 1 A 12 R 05 219 C 1 5:205 2:06 85 A 3 D 11 6:08 79 A 5 B 01
A 10 B 62 227 C 2 A 12 R 06 169 B 1- 7:48 2:07 7 A 3 C 01? 69
A 10 B 63 222 C 2 7:01
A 12 R 08 143 B .,
7:46 3:01 376 A 4 0 02
A 10 B 64 171 C 1 7:02 39 A 3 A 02
A 10 B 65 176 C 2 3:02 375 A 4 D 03 7:03 235 A 4 A 04
A 10 B 66 177 C 2 3:03 374 A 4 D 01 7:05 21 A 2 I 01
A 10 B 67 172 C 1 3:04 370 A 2 A 03 7:06 23 A 2 E 01
A 10 B 68 174 C 2 3:05 185 A 2 H 02 7:07 234 A 3 F 02
A 10 B 69 280 A+ 1 A 3:06 264 7:08 236 A 12 B 01
A 10 B 70 123 C 2 3:07 90 A 4 D 04 7:09 193
A 10 B 71 122 C 1 3:08 77 A 7 A 01 213 8 02
A
7:10 A A
10 B 72 147 C 1
A 10 C 03 409 C 2 7:11 203 A 2 C 07
A 10 C 04 410 C 2 7:12 206 A 3 D 15
A 10 C 05 411 C 2

144 145
 11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page

Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev

Engle Cat H 01 la nd
1 Bc simp 1d 32 138 Abu Gosh
7:13 211 A 7 B 03 446 A 1 A + 1u 25 25 Arad G-15 350 9
7:14 198 A 2 C 09 447 A 1 A 1d 24 45 Arad KL-15 17 7
7:15 60 A 12 R 01 450 A 1 A + 1d 15 33 Arad N-16 1500?
7:16 145 A 2 A 10 475 A 1 Ah + 1d 25 45 Arad C F-9 414 6
7:17 146 A 2 A 13 448 A 1 Ap + 1 1d 20 49 Arad H-14 380 9
7:18 162 A 4 B 05 449 A 1 Ap + 1d8 25 45 Arad 0-16 931
7:19 160 A 4 B 4 451 A 1 Ap + 1 1 22 40 Arad H-9 450a 6
7:20 70 A 4 A 03 476 A 1 Ap 1d 23 48 Arad C G-11 448 7
7:21 209 A 4 B 02 479 A+ 1 A + + 5 30 78 Arad
7:22 98 444 B 2458 85 Arad H-13 1500 4
7:23 579 A 2 C 12 442 B 2 A simp? 1p 32 83? Arad JH-15 surface 6?
445 B 2-3 A R 18 32 67 Arad J-9 502 9
7:24 163 A 4 E 07
443 B 3-4 AB 4AB? 1d 33 63 Arad
7:25 18 A 2 C 03
477 C 1 1p23 76 Arad C? G-9 452a 8
7:26 75 A 8 A 01
480 C 1 1 123 90 Arad
7:27 1 A 8 C 01
452 C 2 + 1235 62 Arad C-11 1500
7:28 200 A 2 H 05
453 C 2 1234 45 Arad G-15 350 9
7:29 16 A 2 A 01 454 C 2 + 1d5 43 Arad C? G-12 429 8
7:30 17 A 2 C 02 455 C 2 B 1d45 52 Arad 643 6
L-9
7:31 20 A 2 H 01 456 C 2 + 2345 64 Arad GH-15 795=1500 Hel
7:32 289 A 2 C 06 457 C 2 + 1p23 58 Arad H-9 512 10
7:33 279 A 6 B 01 478 C 2 145 83 Arad
7:34 278 A 6 0 01 458 C 3 + 5 35 Arad E-11 408b 8
7:35 105 A 8 A 03 110 B 3 2-2? 1 34 64 Aroer A G-11 105 II
7:38 292 A 8 B 01 109 B 3 A 3A?12 + 8 1p 32 80 Aroer B C-11f 62 III
7:39 152 A 2 0 04 111 B sit + 1 30 54 Aroer 0 339 II
7:41 294 A 7 C 01 2 A 1 A + 1 1d 19 44 Ashdod 0 A-20 1075 1-2
7:43 168 A 9 A 01 105 B 0 simp? 1 25 50 Azeka
7:44 166 A 9 0 01 108 B O? 4B2 1 20 40 Azeka
7:45 165 A 9 A 02 107 B 2? A 8?A23 1d 33 65 Azeka
7:46 143 A 12 R 08 106 B 4? 8?A?2 1d 29 58 Azeka
7:47 144 A 2 A 11 484 B 3 AB 5B2 + 1 28 60 Beer Sheba- shu
7:48 169 A 12 R 06 486 B 4 4? 1p 90 Beer Sheba- shu
8:07 93 A 4 E 03 485 B 4 C 5B-C2 1u 23 45 Beer Sheba- shu
8:08 86 A 2 G 02 487 C 3 5 Beer Sheba- shu
8:09 161 A 4 E 05 3 C? Beth EI I
8:23 22 A 3 B 01 4 C? Beth EI II 120
8:24 57 A 2 E 05 5 C? 60 Beth EI VI
6 C? 2 15 58 l3eth EI n of3
7 Bc 3 B 3-4B + 8 30 175 Beth Lehem?
14 A 1 A + 1u 38 Beth Shemesh 374 2
9 A+ 1 A + 25 Beth Shemesh Grave 5
10 A+ 1 Ah + 25 15 66 Beth Shemesh Cistern 25 2c
8 Ac 1 A male 46 24 130 Beth Shemesh Grave 5
466 Ac 1 A 17 102 Beth Shemesh
21 B 1 A simp 1 32 55 Beth Shemesh S-32
17 B 1-2 A 0/3A + 1d 28 67 Beth Shemesh 373 2
18 B 1-2 A 0/3A 1d 24 50 Beth Shemesh "temple" IR2
23 B 2 A 0/3 1 26 52 Beth Shemesh 380 2
34 B 2-3 0 simp? + 35 25 68 Beth Shemesh
28 B 3 45AB2 1u Beth Shemesh
16 B 3 A 3-4A2 R 1p 26 79 Beth Shemesh 383 2
15 B 3 B 3-4B2 1d 29 60? Beth Shemesh Grave 1
22 B 3 B 3?B 1p 41 85 Beth Shemesh 402 3-2
19 B 3? 1u 28 50 Beth Shemesh
27 B 3? 1u 21 42 Beth Shemesh
24 B 4 B 3-4B 1 30 58 Beth Shemesh Debris
25 B 4 B 3?B + 1p 33 82 Beth Shemesh 378
26 B 4 B 3-4B2 1 1d7 29 65 Beth Shemesh 42,sub1

146 147
 22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page a
22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page b
Cat Date Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg. Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainlfirst)
1 7? tomb tomb A 8 C 01 7:27 1 P b Abel 1921:97-100, pI.1:3.
446 8 room sac 1565/4 446 C2 7 t + list no. 16 Feig in Press (2:6)
447 7 room or alley dam? A 495/1 447 7 t + list no. 30 Feig in Press (2:3)
450 888/1 450 7 9 + list no. 22 Feig in Press (2:7)
475 7 room near wall dam C/6411 IAA67-609 475 bead 2 t + first season Unpublished
448 8 alley or court sac? 1571/2 448 7 9 + list no. 27 Feig in Press (2:2)
449 out glacis 6713/1 449 7 b + list no. 21 Feig in Press (2:4)
451 7 room dam? 524/1 IAA64-306? 451 7 f-g + list no. 17 Feig in Press (2:5)
476 7 C/339/1 IAA67-610 476 2 t + 2nd season Unpublished
479 5602/1 IAA67-611 479 37 g? Unpublished
444 found. trench 1080/1 444 7 b + list no. 37 Feig in press (1:2)
442 7? A 2 C 01 5:105 5244 IAA67-968 442 37 t "no. 31 nevi' ? Holland 1975: pl.41:6
445 8 room dam? 799/1 445 7 b + Feig in Press (1:1)
443 pit 912/1? IAA64-329? 443 37 f-g 2nd season Aharoni & Amiran 1964: 49photo
477 8 house? dam? 718/1 IAA67-608 477 2 b + list no. 33 Unpublished
480 3?768/1 IAA64-326 480 2 t + list no. 40? Unpublished
452 out, surface 6827/1 452 7 + Feig in Press (1:3)
453 8 room sac 1542/1 453 A1A 7 + list no. 23 Feig in Press (1:6)
454 8 room? dam? 694/1 454 7 + list no. 26? Feig in Press (1:4)
455 7 room or court dam 5574/1 455 7 + list no. 34 Feig in Press (1:5)
456 pit 5355/1 456 7 + list no. 32 Feig in Press (1:8)
457 9-8 room on floor dom 1233/1 457 7 + list no. 36 Feig in Press (1;7)
478 560/1 IAA67-607 478 2 b-t + Unpublished
458 8 C.108/6 458 7 + list no. 24 Feig in Press
110 7 court house dom 324 110 P b-t Biran & Cohen 1981:fig.16:8.H
109 7 silo dom 1:07 104 109 P f-g Biran & Cohen 1981:fig.8:4. H
111 7 866/1 111 b Details unpublis Biran & Cohen 1981: fig.10:8 H
2 alley? dom? A 1 A 01 0.1035/1 2 Ashdod II-III:fig. 65:11.
105 A 8 A 03 7:35 105 Bliss & Macalister 1902:pI68:4
108 108 Forgotten Bliss 1899: pl.6:6 PEFQS
107 107 Forgotten Bliss 1899: p1.6:5 PEFQS
106 106 Forgotten Bliss 1899: p1.6:7 PEFQS
484 8-7 IAA70-5498 IAA 93-1222 484 PLM A-B 2 9 + Ofer 1965:31 photo (H)
486 8-7 IAA70-5499 IAA 93-1225 486 PLM A-B 2 f? + Ofer 1957:11 text only (H)
485 8-7 IAA70-5497 IAA 93-1223 485 PLM A-B 2 9 + A322 Ofer 1957: 11 text only (H)
487 8-7 487 Ofer 1957: 11 text only (H)
3 IR2 debris A 11 02? 40 3 Kelso 1968:83, 116 index.
4 IR2 open A 11 04? 467 4 Kelso 1968:83, 116 index.
5 IR2 A 11 05? 1011 5 Kelso 1968:88, 116 index.
6 IR2 A 10 B 01? 59 6 Kelso 1968:83, 116 index.
7 8-7 tomb? tomb? A 3 C 01? 2:07 BM.93091 7 PJ 11 Tubb 1980:9,13-14.
14 8? room dom A 1 A 03 1933-4-209 14 P 0 36? bad photo AS4: pl.51:35.
9 8? tomb on divan tomb A 1 A 05 9 P Ac Mackenzie 1912:76, pl.41:9; 42
10 8? cistern A 1 A 06 1933-4-66 10 P H 36? AS 4: pl.51:36
8 8? tomb left sid tomb A 1 A 04 P.444 8 P A1 1 t + Male, eXh.361 Mackenzie 1912: 76, pis. 41-2.
466 911,1909 90-14-350 466 5 t + found 1909
21 A 21 01 7:05 (1930)1251 21 36? AS 1: pI.27:2:2= AS2: p1.50:21
17 8? room or alley dom A 2 C 02 7:30 1933-4-112 17 P A,H+ 36? AS 3: PL.25:5:3; AS 4:PL.51 :31
18 mix storehouse pUbl A 2 C 03 7:25 201 (1928) 18 I? AN=2 36? b Grant 1929: 65: 97 up right.
23 mix room house dam A 2 E 01 7:06 1933-4-166 23 LmP AN 36? b "hat" AS 4: pl.51:33.
34 AS 12 Xi? P.406 . 34 1 b-t + ct. no. 12. UnpUblished?
28 surface/debrs? 1:31 1933-3-110 28 36? "hat' AS 3: fig.4.
16 8? room house dam A 2 A 01 7:29 1933-4-148 16 36? f-g AS 3: pI.24:5:5; AS 4:p1.51 :21
15 8? tomb tomb A 3 C 03 2:01 15 2AMP dv,+ Mackenzie 1912:p1.23 left
22 mix debris A 3 B 01 8:23 1933-4-274 22 P + 36? AS 3: pl.22:6:2; AS 4:p1.51 :32
19 A 2 G 01 1:25 P.411? 19 1? b Mackenzie 1912: p1.13b: 1.
27 1:32 1933-3-4 27 36? AS 3: fig.4.
24 out A 3 0 04 1:38 YEAR 1929 24 36? t AS 4: PL.51 :34
25 mix open dom? A 3 0 02 1:37 1933-4-143 25 P AN 36? 9 AS 3:pl.25:5:4; AS 4:pI.51:22.
26 room? A 3 0 04a 1:11 NS 961931 PM.l.10504 26 1 f + room/alley? AS 2:32 (reg no.96).
20 room? dom? A 2 H 01 7:31 1933-3-128 20 36? b-t AS 3: pI.28:2:2; AS 4:p1.51 :23

148 149
 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page a
11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page 22 February 1996

Cat Date Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.

Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev
4:09
124
20 B+ 4 A 0134A 25 22 97 Beth Shemesh 343 2 tomb A 3 C 02 2:02 P.435
13 8-7? tomb
124 Bc Beth Shemesh room dom A 3 D 03 1:01 1933-4-110
11 8?
13 Bc 3 B 3-4B2 + 31 145 Beth Shemesh Grave 1 AS 12 >t39'! P.400 ex373
12
11 Bc 4 B 4B + 1d 29 164 Beth Shemesh 366 2? room or alley dom? A 11 08 1933-4-209
35 8?
12 Bc 5 A 4A3 + 5 34 159 Beth Shemesh 12.xxxix.1 A 10 B 04 1933-4-62
29 8? cistern
35 C Beth Shemesh 374 2 A 10 B 05 Year 1933
30 8?
29 C 1 1235 100 Beth Shemesh Cistern 25 2c A 10 B 03 Year 1929
31 8?
30 C 1 R 1 90 Beth Shemesh A-1 2 dom A 10 B 02 1933-3-95
32 8? room
31 C 1 123 100 Beth Shemesh 2 A 10 B 06 NS 1207
33 10??
32 C 1 1 96 Beth Shemesh 305 2 A 1 A 07
40
33 C 1 1 104 Beth Shemesh 3N 2a 18/2/12 907
465
40 A 1 A 1d 23 58 Gazer A 3 A 02 7:02
39
465 Ac 1 Ap 46 32 167 Gezer A 5 A 01 1:29
37
39 B 2 B 3B 1 32 44 Gezer A 3 D 05 1:28
38
37 B 3 D simp 1p 22 45 Gazer A 2 E 04 1:34
36
38 B 4 B 4B4? 1 32 68 Gezer cave A 10 B 07
41 cave
36 Bc 2-3 A 4?A 1d Gezer pool A 1 A 08 439
43 8-7 pool
41 C 1 1d5 58 Gazer Cave 8-1 pool A 1 A 09 290
44 8-7 pool
43 A 1 Ap + 1 20 38 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 A 11 503
46 8-7 pool
44 A 1 Ap + 1 1d 30 58 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 A 12 382
47 8-7 pool
46 A 1 Ap + 1 27 48 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 A 13 427
48 8-7 pool
47 A 1 Ap + 1 1d 29 46 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 A 14 462
49 8-7 pool
48 A 1 Ap + 5 1 25 46 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 A 15 441
50 8-7 pool
49 A 1 Ap + 1 1d 23 39 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 0 01 312
51 8-7 pool
50 A 1 Ap + 1d 30 55 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 0 02 86
52 8-7 pool
51 A 4 A + 2 8 32 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 F 01 438
53 8-7 pool
52 A 4 A + 1 57 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 A 16 420
42 8-7 pool
53 A 6 A + 1 1 30 39 Gibeon Pool pool A 1 A 10 557
45 8-7 pool
42 A+ 1 A + 6 235 17 85 Gibeon Pool pool A 2 E 05 8:24 87
57 8-7 pool
45 A+ 1 A Disc + 5 25 53 Gibeon Pool pool A 12 R 01 7:15 568
60 8-7 pool
57 B 3A? + 1d8 66 Gibeon Pool pool A 2 C 04 5:201
55 8-7 pool
60 B 3?2 + 6 1d 19 52 Gibeon Pool pool A 2 C 05 5:203 548
56 8-7 pool
55 B 1-2 A 3A2 + 1 1 67 Gibeon Pool pool A 2A 02 1:39 381
54 8-7 pool
56 B 1-2 A 0/3A + 1 8 40 Gibeon Pool pool A 2 F 02 4:03 422
58 8-7 pool
54 B 3 A 3-4A + 2 1u 35 Gibeon Pool pool pool A 2 H 03 4:06 421
59 8-7
58 B 3 A lock? + 1 1d 25 53 Gibeon Pool pool pool A 10 B 13 432+435
61 8-7
59 B 4 A 3-4A + 1 1 70 Gibeon Pool pool pool A 10 B 08 379
62 8-7
61 C 1 + 1 1d23 91 Gibeon Pool pool pool A 10 A 03 437
63 8-7
62 C 1 + 2 1d6 85 Gibeon Pool pool pool A 10 B 10 330
64 8-7
63 C 1 + 1d24 73 Gibeon Pool pool A 10 B 11 511
65 8-7 pool
64 C 2 + 6 1d5 43 Gibeon Pool pool pool A 10 B 12 419
66 8-7
65 C 2 + 2 15 56 Gibeon Pool pool pool A 10 B 09 434
67 8-7
66 C 2 + 1 1235 59 Gibeon Pool dom 3875
71 house
67 C 2 + 1 15 52 Gibeon Pool A 4 A 03 7:20
70
71 A 3 A 1 38 54 Jericho I stage Ixix A 6 E 01 1:19 760
72 PM.32.1796
70 B 1 C 1u 32 47 Jericho tomb tomb A 5 C 01 6:02
73
72 B 3? E 1 36 64 Jericho II
436 7? A 1 A 53
73 B 5 D 4D2 1 35 75 Jericho Tomb C.1 A 2A 04 1:09
307 IR2?
436 A 1 A 1u 36 Jerusalem Amtra: A 2A 05 1:36 8433-5 IAA8D-2
, 308 8-7?
307 B 3 A 3-4A 1u 28 50 Jerusalem Aviga( A?
437
308 Bc 2 A 3-4A 236 25 165 Jerusalem Aviga( A .. 287 A 1 A 51
437 B 3? 1d Jerusalem Ben D A 10 B 44
288 5013864
287 Ac 1 Ap 35 68? Jerusalem Bliss room A 7 C 01 7:41
294
288 C 2 15 70? Jerusalem Bliss A 2 H 04 1:03
296 room
294 B 2 G 3A + 1u8 22 43? Jerusalem Crow 45 (mixed) A 3 D 09 1:02
295 room
296 B 4 A 0/34A + 1 22 42 Jerusalem Crow 44 A 10 C 09
297 room
295 B 4 B 3-4B + 1d 22 55 Jerusalem Crow 44 A 10 B 45
298
297 C 1 C + 1p26 94? Jerusalem Crow 41 A 11 43
299
298 C 2 + 1 123 58 Jerusalem Crow N13S 23 6'1
282
299 C 3 + 56 48 Jerusalem Crow WNN D6?
284
282 A 1 A 1d Jerusalem Dunce
285

150 151
 11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page
22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page b
Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainlfirst) Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev
124 15 Kelso 1962 284 A 1 A ridr? 1 Jerusalem Dunce
13 2MPR dv+ 1 Mackenzie 1912:pls.22:9, 23. 285 A 1 A 1d Jerusalem Dunce
11 P + 36? AS 3: p1.23. 283 A 1 Ap 1d Jerusalem Dunce
12 1 f + cf. no. 34 Unpublished, "highplace" area 281 B+ 5 Jerusalem Dunce
35 36? no fig. AS 3:96 286 C 1 1234 Jerusalem Dunce 9
29 P H 36? AS 3:621; AS4: pI.51:29 320 A 1 A 1 23 50 Jerusalem Kenya
30 36? AS 4: pl.51:24. 321 A 1 A 1u 23 33 Jerusalem Kenya
31 36? "no peg" AS 4: pl.51:30. 322 A 1 A 1 26 43 Jerusalem Kenya
32 PSM AN 36? AS 3:pI.25:8:3. 323 A 1 A 1 24 42 Jerusalem Kenya
33 36? "level 3" AS 2:320 nO.1207. 328 A 1 A 1 Jerusalem Kenya
40 Gezer 2:233, fig.382:7. 329 A 1 A 1 Jerusalem Kenya
465 5 f + found 1912? 330 A 1 A 1 Jerusalem Kenya
39 f Gazer 2:418; Gazer 3:p1.221 :20 331 A 1 A 1 Jerusalem Kenya
37 Gezer 2:418; Gezer 3:p1.221 :22 341 A 1 A + 6 1d 26 56 Jerusalem Kenya
38 f Gezer 2:418; Gazer 3:pl.221:21 342 A 1 A + 1d 20 55 Jerusalem Kenya A 957.7
36 f Gezer 2: fig.502. 343 A 1 A 1u 26 37 Jerusalem Kenya
41 PBR AN rattle, burial? Gezer 3:pl.18:28, plan1 344 A 1 A 1u 21 22 Jerusalem Kenya
43 P F 12 f Gibeon WS: fig.41:439. 345 A 1 A 1d 29 61 Jerusalem Kenya
44 P F 12 f Gibeon WS: fig.41:290. 346 A 1 A 1d 21 53 Jerusalem Kenya
46 P F 12 b-f Gibeon WS: fig.41:503. 347 A 1 A + 6 1d 23 54 Jerusalem Kenya A 957.18
47 p F 12 9 Gibeon WS: fig.41:382. 348 A 1 A + 2 1u 14 24 Jerusalem Kenya
48 p F 12 f Gibeon WS: fig.41:427. 349 A 1 A 1u 18 34 Jerusalem Kenya
49 p F 12 f Gibeon WS: fig.41 :462. 350 A 1 A + 1 1d 29 56? Jerusalem Kenya L XII 159.17 lAc
50 P F 12 f Gibeon WS: fig.41:441. 351 A 1 A + 1 30 45 Jerusalem Kenya L 853.7 lAd
51 p F 12 b Gibeon WS: fig.41:312. 352 A 1 A + 1 19 40 Jerusalem Kenya
52 p F 12 b-f Gibeon WS: fig.41 :86. 353 A 1 A 1d 24 58 Jerusalem Kenya L 14.34 I lAc
53 P F 12 f Gibeon WS: fig.41:438. 354 A 1 A + 1u 19 40 Jerusalem Kenya
42 P F 12 9 Gibeon WS: pI.39:420. 355 A 1 A 1d 19 50 Jerusalem Kenya
45 P F 12 f disk in hands Gibeon WS: fig.41:557. 356 A 1 A 1d 18 48 Jerusalem Kenya
57 p F 12 b Gibeon WS: fig.40:87. 357 A 1 A 1 16 40 Jerusalem Kenya
60 p F 12 f Gibeon WS: fig.40:568. +
358 A 1 A 1d 29 58 Jerusalem Kenya L IV 332.22 lAc
55 P F 25 9 engle 5:201 Gibeon WS: fig.40:527. 318 A 1 Ap 1 29 69 Jerusalem Kenya
56 P F 12 b engle 5:203 Gibeon WS: fig.40:548. 319 A 1 Ap 1u 24 32 Jerusalem Kenya
54 p F 12 b-f Gibeon WS: fig.40:381. 324 Ap +
A 1 1d 24 48 Jerusalem Kenya
58 P F 12 b-f Gibeon WS: fig.40:422. 325 A 1 Ap + 1d 29 53 Jerusalem Kenya
59 p F 25 f Gibeon WS: fig.40:421. 326 A 1 Ap 1d 32 66 Jerusalem Kenya
61 P F 12 9 Gibeon WS: fig.39:432+435. 327 A 1 Ap + 1 14 24 Jerusalem Kenya
62 P F 12 9 Gibeon WS: fig.39:379. 339 A 1 Ap 1 22 53 Jerusalem Kenya L I 14.33 lAc
63 p F 12 b-f Gibeon WS: fig.39:437. 340 A 1 Ap 1d 21 50 Jerusalem Kenya
64 p F 12 9 Gibeon WS: fig.39:330. 332 A 2 A + 6 1 26 40 Jerusalem Kenya
65 P F 12 9 Gibeon WS: fig.39:511. 362 A 2 A 1d 30 48 Jerusalem Kenya
66 P F 12 9 Gibeon WS: fig.39:419. 363 A 2 A 8 1 27 45 Jerusalem Kenya L XII 158.16 lAd
67 P F 12 f Gibeon WS: fig.39:434. 364 A 2 A 1u 32 39 Jerusalem Kenya
71 Jericho IV:555, fig.223:6. 365 A 2 A + 1 30 47 Jerusalem Kenya A 953.13
70 f exceptional? Sellin & Watzinger 1913:pl.40. 333 A 3 A 8 1d 20 53 Jerusalem Kenya
72 25 Double molded Jericho IV:555, fig.223:5. 335 A 3 A + 1u 27 44 Jerusalem Kenya
73 1 f + 1931season Holland 1975:84,190, pl.41:9. 336 A 3 A + 1 1d 26 56 Jerusalem Kenya
436 6? b Amiran & Eitan 1970: pl.8b 366 A 4 A + 1 1d8 41 66 Jerusalem Kenya A 301.12
307 f Avigad 1970: pl.4c 369 A 4 A + 1 53 69 Jerusalem Kenya
308 P F 5 + Avigad 1970: photo 15 367 A 5 A + 1d 50 Jerusalem Kenya A
437 b Ben Dov 1982:55 (H) 368 A 5 A + 4 1 Jerusalem Kenya A
287 Bliss 1898: pI.27:50. 338 A+ 1 A + 235 21 80 Jerusalem Kenya
288 Bliss 1898: pl.27:49. 359 A+ 1 A disk + 235 19 42 Jerusalem Kenya C? 10?
294 24 b PEFA V:1929: p1.11:3 334 A+ 3 A + 8 235 29 80 Jerusalem Kenya
296 + 24 b-f PEFA V:1929: p1.11:2 302 B 3-4? 1u8 48 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1
295 + 24 f PEFA V:1929: p1.11:4 292 B O? schin + 1 Jerusalem Kenya
297 24 f PEFA V:1929: p1.11:2 377 B 1-2 simp? + 1 1 28 64 Jerusalem Kenya A 840
298 24 Holland 1975: p1.3:11 370 B 3 A 3-4A? R 8 42 Jerusalem Kenya
299 b Holland 1975: p1.4:15 300 B 3 B 3-4B + 1 1u 26 52 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1966
282 9 Duncan 1931:77 up left 371 B 3 B 3-4B + 1 1d 24 69 Jerusalem Kenya
284 f Duncan 1931:77 up 3 from left 372 B 3 B 3-4B + 1d 25 82 Jerusalem Kenya

152 153
 22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page a
22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page b
Cat Date Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.
Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainffirst)
283
285 b-f Duncan 1931:77 up right
281
283 b-f Duncan 1931:77 up 2 from left
286 98227?
281 b-f Duncan 1931:77 pI. low center
320 A 1 A 33
~ 286 b-f Duncan 1931:77 low right
321 A 1 A 32
320 28 Holland 1975: fig.2:1
322 A 1 A 31
321 25? Holland 1975: fig.1:16
323 A 1 A 36
322 27 Holland 1975: fig.1:15
328 A 1 A 48
323 23 Holland 1975: fig.2:4
329 A 1 A 49
328 26 Holland 1975.
330 A 1 A 50
329 20 Holland 1975.
331 A 1 A 52
330 26 Holland 1975.
341 A 1 A 20
331 12? Holland 1975
342 A 1 A 21 6809 IAA68-797
341 21 Holland 1975: fig.1:4
343 A 1 A 22
342 25? + Holland 1975: fig.1:5
344 A 1 A 23
343 17 Holland 1975: fig.1:6
345 A 1 A 24
344 23 Holland 1975: fig.1:7
346 A 1 A 25
345 27 Holland 1975: fig.1:8
347 A 1 A 26 6816 WM.619
346 21 Holland 1975: fig.1:9
348 A 1 A 27
347 29 Holland 1975: fig.1:11
349 A 1 A 28
348 99 Holland 1975: fig.1:11
350 fill A 1 A 29 3889
349 20 Holland 1975: fig.1:12
351 fill A 1 A 30 6003 IAA68-822
350 99 Holland 1975: fig.1:13
352 A 1 A 41
351 25? + Holland 1975: fig.1:14
353 A 1 A 42 7371 10.3221
352 UN Holland 1975: fig.2:9
354 A 1 A 43
353 31 Holland 1975: fig.2:10
355 A 1 A 44
354 20 Holland 1975: fig.2:11
356 A 1 A 45
355 22 Holland 1975: fig.2:12
357 A 1 A 46
356 Holland 1975: fig.2:14, pI.1:2
358 A 1 A 47 7218 10.3220
357 Holland 1975:fig.2:14, p1.1:3
318 A 1 A 35
358 31 Holland 1975: fig.2:15.
319 A 1 A 34
318 17 Holland 1975: fig.2:3
324 A 1 A 37
319 25? Holland 1975: fig.2:2
325 A 1 A 38
324 17 Holland 1975: fig.2:5
326 A 1 A 39
325 17 Holland 1975: fig.2:6
327 A 1 A 40
326 28 Holland 1975: fig.2:7
339 8-7? A 1 A 18 7376
327 26 Holland 1975: fig.2:8
340 A 1 A 19 5756 1967.866
339 23 Holland 1975: fig.1:2
332 A 1 8 03
340 18 Holland 1975: fig.1:3
362 A 1 8 02
332 25? Holland 1975: fig.3:2, pl.1:5
363 fill A 1 8 04 3923
362 25? Holland 1975: fig.3:1
364 A 1 8 05
363 17 Holland 1975: fig.3:3
365 A 1 8 06 3338 IAA68-813
364 25 Amr 1988:no.9 Holland 1975: fig.3:4
333 A 1 C 01
365 2 + Holland 1975: fig.3:5
335 A 1 C 03
333 23 Holland 1975: fig.3:6
336 A 1 C 04
335 25? Holland 1975: fig.3:8
366 A 1 D 04
336 21 Holland 1975: fig.3:9, p1.1:7
369 A 1 D 03 379 1962A.346
366 21 Holland 1975: fig.3:11
367 A 1 E 01 6222 1967.867
369 27 Holland 1975: fig.3:10
368 A 1 E 02
367 18 Holland 1975: fig.3:12
338 A 1 A 17
368 5 Holland 1975: fig.3:13
359 A 1 G 01 1661 196:.t.523
338 17 Holland 1975: fig.1:1
334 A 1 C 02
359 18 disk Holland 1975: fig.4:1, pI.1:9
302 8 cave cave? A 12 R 04 C.790
334 25? Holland 1975: fig.3:7, pI.1:6
292 A 8 8 01 7:38
302 + 26 b Holland 1975: fig.13:9; p1.5:6
377 A 6 A 02 4:07 3337 IAA68-811
292 23 f? Holland 1975: fig.6:13
370 A 2A 03 3:04 901? 1962.579?
377 25? b-f + Holland 1975: fig.6:10
300 8 cave entrance cave? A 3 C 04 1:17 C.391 D.1968.6
370 25? b at Oxford? Holland 1975: fig.6:1
371 A 3 8 02 1:15
300 19 f Locus A.966.3Y Holland 1975: fig.6:4
372 A 3 8 03 5:106 J.9698
371 25 f Amr 1988: nO.1 Holland 1975: fig.6:2
374 A 4 D 01 3:03
372 25 b-f Holland 1975: fig.6:3, p1.2:7
375 A 4 D 03 3:02
376 374 21 f-g Kenyon 1967:9:3 Holland 1975: p1.3:1
A 4 D 02 3:01

154 155
 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page a
11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page 22 February 1996

Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.

Cat Date
Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev 1:16 7366 IAA68-803
301 8 cave cave? A 3 0 07
374 B 3 C 45C2? + 1 29 53 Jerusalem Kenya A 3 0 06 1:18
373 3507 IAA68-810
375 B 3 C 5C2 1u 37 53 Jerusalem Kenya A 6 E 02 1:14
378
376 8 3? C 45C2 + 1d8 32 69 Jerusalem Kenya 404 A 10 B 37
301 B 4 B 482-3 + 1 1u 26 45 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1 A 10 B 41 C.777 1964.525?
304 8 cave cave?
373 8 4 8 3-48 1u 28 43 Jerusalem Kenya cave? A 11 38 C.335f?366 1969A.704
306 8 cave
378 8 5 E 3-4? + 1 1d 29 60 Jerusalem Kenya A 156a A 10 B 23 792
379
404 C 1 Jerusalem Kenya 381 A 10 A 05
3339 IAA68-807
304 C 1 1234 85 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1
389 A 10 B 21
306 C 1 + 1235 144 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1 A 10 B 22 J.9702
390 7971 1962A.906?
379 C 1 + 8 146 91 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 24
391 5463
381 C 1 + 15 83 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 29
396 fill
4373
389 C 1 + 1d 102 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 31
398 fill
390 C 1 1d45 66 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 32
399
391 C 1 16 85 Jerusalem Kenya A? 108.1? A 10 B 34
396 C 1 + Jerusalem Kenya L XIV 371.2 lAd 402 6812 WM.622
12?5 58 A 1 G 03
361
398 C 1 1235 84 Jerusalem Kenya L XII 159.32 lAb A 1 G 02
360 C.365 IAA68-791
399 C 1 + 16 100 Jerusalem Kenya cave? A 10 I 02
303 8 cave
402 C 1 + 1236 101 Jerusalem Kenya cave? A 10 B 43 C.774
305 8 cave
361 C 1 0 disk 1234 100 Jerusalem Kenya AA 105.14c? A 10 A 04
380 7217 01968.12
360 C 1 O? disk + 7 1236 84 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 14
382 fill
7264
303 C 1 E 1d26 76 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1 A 10 B 15
383 fill
305 C 2 + 1235 50 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1 A 10 B 16
384
380 C 2 + 23?5 43 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 17
385
382 C 2 + 15? 61 Jerusalem Kenya L IX 912.30 lAd
386 A 10 B 18 3973
383 + L IV lAc 3342 IAA 68-814
C 2 1235 37 Jerusalem Kenya 332.18a
387 fill A 10 B 19
384 C 2 disk? + 15 48 Jerusalem Kenya
388 A 10 B 20
385 C 2 35 68 Jerusalem Kenya
392 A 10 B 25
386 C 2 + 53 Jerusalem Kenya L XV 457.23 IAa A 10 B 26
393 IAA68-816
387 C 2 1 1235 50 Jerusalem Kenya L VII 609.5 lAd A 10 B 27 4169
394 fill
5432
388 C 2 + 1235 36 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 28
395 fill
J.9699
392 C 2 + 1234 82 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 30
397
393 C 2 + 15 56 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 35
400
394 C 2 15 40 Jerusalem Kenya L VII 608.18 lAb A 10 B 33 5108
401 fill
395 C 2 1235 56 Jerusalem Kenya L 369.13 lAd A 10 B 42
408
397 C 2 1d35 90 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 C 03
409 3509 IAA 68-812
400 C 2 + 15 48 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 C 04
410
401 C 2 + 15 74 Jerusalem Kenya L VIII 711.2 lAd
411 A 10 C 05
408 + 4444? 1966A.101?
C 2 1 1235 56 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 C 06
412 5890 IAA68-821
409 C 2 15? 37 Jerusalem Kenya
413 A 10 C 07
410 C 2 15 44 Jerusalem Kenya A 669.2I6? A 10 C 08
414
411 C 2 + 1 1234 55 Jerusalem Kenya A 11 19
416
412 C 2 1234 54 Jerusalem Kenya R? 845.71 A 11 20
417
413 C 2 + 14?5 90 Jerusalem Kenya A 955.18 A 11 21
418
414 C 2 1245 42 Jerusalem Kenya A 11 22
419
416 C 2 + 1235 47 Jerusalem Kenya A 11 23
420
417 C 2 + 1245 48 Jerusalem Kenya A 11 24
421
418 C 2 1235 27 Jerusalem Kenya A 11 25
422
419 C 2 1235 82 Jerusalem Kenya A 11 26
423
420 C 2 + 1p5? 82 Jerusalem Kenya A 11 27
424
421 C 2 + 1u25 42 Jerusalem Kenya A 11 32
429 7260 10.3336
422 C 2 1234 60 Jerusalem Kenya
403 A 10 B 36
423 C 2 1234 48 Jerusalem Kenya cave? A 11 39 74601248 O' WM.608?
315 8 cave entrance
424 C 2 disk? 1234 77 Jerusalem Kenya cave? A 11 41 C.793
316 8 cave entrance
429 C 2 + 4 23?5 42 Jerusalem Kenya cave? A 11 40 C.796
317 8 cave entrance
403 C 2? + 1p23 70 Jerusalem Kenya AA 107.14 A 11 17
415
315 C 3 + 5 64 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1 A 11 28
425
316 C 3 + 5 33 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1 A 11 29
426
317 C 3 + 5 58 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1 A 11 30
427 1133? 1962A.907?
415 C 3 + 5 64 Jerusalem Kenya A 11 31
428
425 C 3 + 5 61 Jerusalem Kenya A 10 B 38
405
426 C 3 + 5 53 Jerusalem Kenya
406
o
A 1 B 39

156 157
 11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page
22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page b
Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainlfirst) Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev
375 25? Kenyon 1967:9:4 Holland 1975: fig.6:9 427 C 3 5 56 Jerusalem Kenya
376 32 Kenyon 1967:9:5 Holland 1975: fig.6:8; p1.6:3 428 C 3 + 5 81 Jerusalem Kenya C? 6.8-18
301 + 2 9 + Holland 1975: fig.6:6 405 C 2 1 Jerusalem Kenya
373 25? b Amr 1988:no.2? Holland 1975: fig.6:5 406 C 2 1 Jerusalem Kenya
378 25? + Kenyon 1967:9:6 Holland 1975: fig.6:12 407 C 2 1 Jerusalem Kenya
404 26 Holland 1975: A 10837 312 C 2 O? obje? 235 40 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1
304 + 18 Holland 1975: fig.9:1 313 C 2 + 2345 43 Jerusalem Kenya A A-26 Cave 1
306 + 18 reg. 366? Holland 1975: fig.12:4 314 C 2 + 5? Jerusalem Kenya A A-26? Cave wash
379 25 f Kenyon 1967: 10:4 Holland 1975: fig.8:1 430 C? 73? Jerusalem Kenya Cave 1?
381 25 Holland 1975: fig.7:2 431 C? Jerusalem Kenya
389 2* Kenyon 1967:10:6 Holland 1975: fig.10:6 432 C? Jerusalem Kenya
390 25 Kenyon 1967:10:3 Holland 1975: fig.10:7 434 A 1 A 1d Jerusalem Lux
391 27 Holland 1975: fig.8:2 433 A 2 A 1d Jerusalem Lux
396 30 Holland 1975: fig.8:7 435 A 3 A 1d Jerusalem Lux
398 25 Amr 1988: nO.5? Holland 1975: fig.8:9 289 8 1-2 A 0/3A 1d 26 58 Jerusalem Macal IR?
399 Kenyon 1967:10:5 Holland 1975: fig.8:10, p1.3:8 291 8 4 8 3-48? + 1 1 27 53 Jerusalem Macal IR?
402 21 Holland 1975: fig.8:12, p13:9 290 C 1 + 123 127 Jerusalem Macal 9 IR?
361 30 disk Holland 1975: fig.4:3 473 8 2-3 A? ?2 1u 25 50 Jerusalem Mamil; F 35, mixed
360 23 disk Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:2 467 C 1 1235 75 Jerusalem Mamil; Tomb 5,11
303 P F 2 + hand upwards Holland 1975: fig.10:5 468 C 1 1d23 45 Jerusalem Mamil; Tomb 5,11
305 P F 17 Holland 1975: fig.9:3 469 C 1 1d23 110 Jerusalem Mamil; Tomb II
380 30 Holland 1975: fig.7:1 438 A ? 1 Jerusalem Mazar R.16
382 19 Holland 1975: fig.7:3 440 8 1? simp? 1 40 53 Jerusalem Mazar IV EF/15
383 26 Holland 1975: fig.7:4 441 8 ? Jerusalem Mazar 15026
384 30 Holland 1975: fig.7:5, p1.3:5 439 C 2 1236 84 Jerusalem Mazar 6015
385 25? Amr 1988: nO.3 Holland 1975: fig.7:6 279 8 2? E 3-4? 1d Jerusalem Vincer
386 20 Jerusalem 1: Holland 1975: fig.7:7 278 8 4 E? lock? 1d Jerusalem Vincer
387 2 + Jerusalem 1: Holland 1975: fig.7:8 462 A 1 A + 1d 25? Kh. Anim 36
388 25? Amr 1988: nO.6? Holland 1975: fig.7:9 68 A 1 Ap 1d5 24 35 Kh. Hoga Surface
392 32 Holland 1975: fig.8:3 459 C 2 1235 70 Kh. Jeresh 19
393 30 Holland 1975: fig.8:4 460 C 2 1235 80 Kh. Jeresh 19
394 25? Holland 1975: fig.8:5 461 C 3 5 25 Kh. Jeresh 19
395 20 Jerusaelm 1: Holland 1975: fig.8:6 69 8 1-2 ? ? 1u 40 40 Kh.Rabud 8 103 82
397 25 Holland 1975: fig.8:8, p1.3:7 95 A 1 A R 1 25 38 Lachish 0 500
400 31 Holland 1975: p1.3:10 81 Ac A
1 34 104 Lachish E-30 1002 1-5
401 21 Jerusalem 1: Holland 1975: fig.8:11 82 Ac 1 A 1d 25 135 Lachish 8-6 106
408 26 Holland 1975: fig.9:2 80 Ae 1 Ap 22 98 Laehish 8-6 106
409 25? Holland 1975: fig.9:6 93 8 1 C 1u 29 70 Laehish 500
410 2 + Holland 1975: fig.9:7 99 8 2 A simp? 8-7 29 Laehish 41 IV?
411 25 Amr 1988:no.7 Holland 1975: fig.9:8 97 8 E simp?
2 1 30 50 Laehish 135 III
412 27 Holland 1975: fig.9:9 83 8 3 A 3-4A 1d 32 70 Laehish 500
413 2 + Holland 1975: fig.9:10 84 8 3 A 3-4A 1u 33 48 Laehish 500
414 25 Holland 1975: fig.9:11, pl.4:1 86 8 3 A 3-4A + 1p 21 60 Lachish P-17 Shaft
416 25 Holland 1975: fig.11 :1, pl.4:7 89 8 3 8 482 1 1 26 63 Laehish H-17 1078 III
417 99 Holland 1975: fig.11:2 90 8 3 C 4-5C2 1 29 60 Laehish 500
418 25 Holland 1975: fig.11:3 92 8 3 0 401 1u 32 62 Laehish Of)(
419 21 Incised niples Holland 1975: fig.11:4 Of)(
91 8 3? C 4-5C2 1p 25 72 Laehish
420 28 Holland 1975: fig.11:5 98 8 4 1d78 27 58 Laehish 94c VI?
421 26 Holland 1975: fig.11 :6 Of)(
85 8 4 8 3-48 1d 26 58 Laehish
422 99 Holland 1975: fig.11:7 87 8 4 482
8 5 1d 27 63 Laehish H-17 1087 III
423 99 Holland 1975: fig.11:8 Of)(
88 8 4 8 482? 5 1u 33 50 Laehish
424 26 disk? Holland 1975: fig.11:9 Of)(
94 8 4 0 402-3 1d 30 85 Laehish
429 26 Holland 1975: fig.12:1 79 8+ 3 8 383 + 5 5 27 114 Laehish A-6 120
403 31 No fig.! photo Holland 1975: A10836 75 8e 1d 26 155 Laehish 8-6 106
315 + 30 entrance wash Holland 1975: fig.12:5 76 8e 1 C 1d 25 152 Laehish E-30 1002 1-5
316 + 99 entrance wash Holland 1975: pl.4:14 77 8e 3-4 F 582 6 31 151 Lachish E-30 1002 6ft
317 + 99 entrance wash Holland 1975: p1.4:13 74 8c 4 A 4A2 1d 27 181 Lachish
415 99 Holland 1975: fig.10:9 78 8e 2 G 4-58 6 27 150 Lachish E-30 1002 6ft
425 99 Holland 1975: p1.4:8 96 C 2 15 33 Laehish G-18 27 I?
426 33 Holland 1975: p1.4:9 100 C 3 5 65 Laehish 61a II
427 26 Holland 1975: p1.4:10 101 C 3 5 58 Laehish 24 II

158 159
 22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page a
22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page b
Cat Date Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.
Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainlfirst)
407 A 10 8 40
428 27 Holland 1975: fig.11: 10
312 8 cave cave? A 11 37 C.770
405 99 Holland 1975: A 1OB38
313 8 cave cave? A 11 36 C.779
406 12? Holland 1975: A10839
314 8 cave cave? A 11 35 C.792
407 26 Holland 1975: A 1OB40
430 81 cave? cave? A 11 33 1106? WM.657? 312 + 17 Object Holland 1975: fig.12:3
431 A 11 34
313 + 19 Holland 1975: fig.12:2
432 A 11 44
314 + 99 Holland 1975: p1.4:11
434 8-71 A 1 A 53a
430 30 Wheel made? Holland 1975: A.11.33
433 8-71 A 1 8 06a 431 22 Holland 1975: A.11.34
435 8-71 A 1 C 04a
432 99 Holland 1975: A.11.44
289 A 2 C 06 7:32
434 * Lux 1972: taf.22:upper right
291 A 3 D 08 1:26
433 * Lux 1972: taf.22:upper middle
290 A 11 42 98(22A} ?
435 * Lux 1972: taf.22:upper left
473 mix 231
289 b PEFA IV:1926: fig.197 right
467 8-7 tomb repositor tomb 5-105/1 IAA91-2159
291 b-f PEFA IV:1926: f1G.197 left.
468 8-7 tomb repositor tomb 5-84 IAA 91-2153
290 f PEFA IV:1926: fig.194
469 8-7 tomb tomb IAA52-99
473 * b-f + Courtesy R Reich
438 1469
467 P C1AN 2 f + Courtesy R Reich
440
468 P C1AN 2 f + Courtesy R Reich
441 269k
469 P Amiran 1956: pl.c:19 (H)
439 8-71 tomb? tomb? 746/10 IAA93-748
438 Nadelman 1989a: 125
279 A 6 8 01 7:33
440 b-f 15.9.1977 Nadelman 1989a: photo 120
278 A 6 D 01 7:34
441 Nadelman 1989a:125
462 7 bedrock destru dom 475/2
439 PR 2 + Nadelman 1989a: photo 121
68 surface A 1 A 16a
279 f Vincent 1911: pI.16:2+4
459 8-7 room IMng dom 60
278 9 Vincent 1911: pI.16:3+5
460 8-7 room living dom 49
462 P AN2 * f + Unpublished, courtesy D Amit
461 8-7 room living dom 71
68 f Gophna 1970:29, pI.6:6.
69 8 house? dom? 7:01 79/1
459 P C,AN * f + Unpublished, courtesy D. Amit
95 out quarter A 1 A 56a 3880 PM.35.3068
460 P C,AN * b + Unpublished, courtesy D. Amit
81 71 tomb tomb A 1 A 54 1255a PM.33.2056
461 P C,AN * b + Unpublished, courtesy D. Amit
82 71 tomb room c tomb A 1 A 55 333
69 b Kochavi 1974: fig.8:11.
80 71 tomb room c tomb A 1 A 56 332
95 1 f + 1934-5, Persian? Holland 1975: pl.41:2
93 out quarter A 4 E 03 8:07 3886
81 P 8A? 1 b + eXh. no. 360 Lachish 3: pI.28:14.
99 9-8? open 2:04 373/2 IAA 78-2808
82 PB f Lachish 3: pI.27:3.
97 8 pit lopen area 4:02 884/4 IAA 78-2807
80 P ABAN f Lachish 3: pI.27:1.
83 out quarter open A 2 A 07 5:107 3890
93 b Lachish 3: pl.31:7.
84 out quarter open A 2 A 06 3:12 3885
99 P Lachish 5: pls.12:2, 33:2.
86 water system? publ? A 2 G 02 8:08 7247
97 f Lachish 5: pl.33:3.
89 8 room house A 3 F 03 1:33 7094 PM.39.819
83 b Lachish 3: pI.31:9.
90 out quarter A 4 D 04 3:07 3891
84 b Lachish 3: pl.31:12.
92 A 5 8 02 6:07
86 b-f the great shaft Lachish 3: pl.31:8.
91 A 4 D 05 5:108 3069
89 PLm 1 f + Lachish 3: pl.31:6.
98 IR1! open 7:22 789/1 IAA 78-2809
90 f Lachish 3: pl.31:13.
85 A 3 D 11 2:06
92 9 Lachish 3: pl.31:1.
87 8 street A 3 D 13 1:12 7144
91 f Lachish 3: pl.31:5.
88 A 3 D 12 1:13
98 P 2 + Lachish 5: pls.12:2, 33:4.
94 A 5 C 02 6:01
85 f Debrisl Surface Lachish 3: pl.31:3.
79 8-71 tomb, communal tomb A 5 8 01 6:08 5187 PM.36.2245
87 PLm f Lachish 3: pl.31:4.
75 71 tomb room c tomb A 8 A 01 7:26 334 12,73.268a
88 f Lachish 3: pl.31:14.
76 71 tomb tomb A 4A 05 2:03 1225 PM.33.2055
94 9 Lachish 3: p1.31:2
77 71 tomb tomb A 7 A 01 3:08 1318a
79 BR 1 f + Communal tomb? Lachish 3: pI.27:8.
74 1:05
75 P 14 f Lachish 3:pl.27:4.
78 71 tomb tomb A 7 8 01 3:11 1318 PM.34.128
76 P B? 1 f + exh.no.372 Lachish 3: pI.28:11.
96 Per? surface gate publ? A 10 8 47 77 P B? 9 Lachish 3: pl.28:13.
100 7 room? 384/1
74 13 9 donat. Colt 1934 Patai 1967:65, photo 1.
101 7 room dom? 177/1
78 P B? 1 9 + exhib. no. 370 Lachish 3: pI.28;10.
103 surface
96 P Lachish 3: pI.32:2.
104 71 dom? A 11 44a IM.55-11
100 P Lachish 3: pI.12:6.
472 cave on bedroc 451
101 PV Lachish 5: pI.12:5.
102 surface A 3 D 14 1:35 M.1776
103 f? Found 1981. Hubner 1989:500, tat.7.
474 surface IAA63-312

160 161
 22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cant. Page a
11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page
Cat Date Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.
Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev 162/21? IAA64-1151
117 A 1 B 09
103 B SR ? 8?B? 18 29 50 Malhata 118 7? room entrance publ? A 1 G 05
104 C 1 1u 110 Malhata B? 116 A 1 A 62 30???
472 A 1 Ap + 7 30 Maresha 75 1386/xv A 1 J 12 1232/2 IAA62-8
119 7?
102 B 4 B 3-4B 18 Megiddo N-4 surface A 2 F 03 4:05 7321?5921, IAA64-1376
120
474 C 2 1235 Mevaseret=Moza 121 7? A 2A 14 5:08
117 A 2 A 1 32 45 Ramat Rahel V A 10 B 71 598211 IAA64-1375
122
118 A+ 1 Ap disk 25 RamatRahel 215/6 286 V A 10 B 70
123
116 A? 1 A harig 1? RamatRahel Va? pit dom? 724
113 8-7
119 Ac 1 C 1d34 16 115 RamatRahel 329 V dom 912
112 8-7
120 B 3 A simp 1 21 45 Ramat Rahel dom 136
114 8-7
121 B 3 A 3-4A? 1d RamatRahel V 2963
463 8-7 dom
122 C 1 1d23 85 RamatRahel 23710
578 8-7 dom
123 C 2 45 RamatRahel 2969
577 8-7 dom
113 A 1 Ap 1 50 Ramot06 B 120 943
115 8-7 dom
112 B 3 A 3-4A2 1 31 45 Ramot06 C 179 13748
132 8-7 dom
114 C 2 1235 Ramot06 B 775 1941
310 8-7 dom
463 C 2 35 40 Ramot06 C1 1183 13763
311 8-7 dom
578 C 2 1p35 78 Ramot06 243 2737=1253
464 8-7 dom
577 C 2? 135 20 Ramot06 1152 766
309 8-7 dom
115 C 3 5 50 Ramot06 C1 196 A 10 B 72 4897
147 debris
132 C 3 + 5 35 Ramot06 0 1116 A 10 A 12 3318
293 debris
310 C 3 5 46 Ramot06 2195 A 2 C 13 1185
337
311 C 3 + 5 60 Ramot06 0 2111 A 2 C 12 7:23 1716? 1.788
195
464 C 3 5 34 Ramot06 B 131 14218?118'
254 8?
309 C 3 5 37 Ramoto6 131 5103/1
255 8 storehouse publ
147 C 1 1346 Samaria OE4-5 S11.v 7760/1
256 8?
293 C 2 1d5 Samaria S5.b 14125/1
251 8 storehouse wa publ
337 B 1? 2-3? 1d 32 65 Shechem 7648/1 IAA 93-414
481 8? tomb tomb
195 B 2? + 18 34 62 Shechem hel 1462/2
257 8? street fill
254 A 1 A + 2 1d 32 50 Tel BeerSheba A 1 A 02 1086/1 IAA 78-1437
252 8 casemate floor sac?
255 A 1 A 1d7 15 20 Tel BeerSheba A1 0-18 270 II 3:14 8076/1 ? IAA 93-14
267 surface
256 A 1 A 1d7 23 42 Tel BeerSheba 827 15853/1 IAA 93-17
470 8 street
251 A 1 Ah 3457 19 57 Tel Beer Sheba R-19 1007 II 2:05 3449/1 IAA 93-16
262 8 room house publ?
481 A 1 Ah 5 30 46 Tel BeerSheba tomb? 14105/1
266 8 storehouse publ
257 A 1 Ap + 1u 16 29 Tel Beer Sheba B T-1 39=38 II A 3 0 01? 6:05 4739/1
263 8 alley
252 Ac 1 Ah + 8 25 135 Tel Beer Sheba B T-2 25 II dom 3:06 7419/1 IAA 93-13
264 8 room house
267 B 45?23 + 6 18 35 50 Tel Beer Sheba 0 S-2 553 HEL 1:04 328/1 IAA 93-15
260 8 street
470 B 1? A? 1 1d7 25 52 Tel Beer Sheba U-3 38 1546211
265 8
262 B 2 A simp? 1d 26 50 Tel BeerSheba A4 J-13 443 1075211
259 8
266 B 2? 18 23 48 Tel Beer Sheba G R-19 1603=1004 1420/1
258 8
263 B 3-4 3-4? 18 23 45 Tel Beer Sheba C S-10 521 3:15 7289/1 ?
261 8 room house dom
264 B 3? 4-5?2 1 33 55 Tel Beer Sheba F1 G-10 766 119211
253 8 storehouse publ
260 B 4 B? 3-4B? 1 23 45 Tel Beer Sheba H-16 462 publ? 9398/1 ?
268 8 room house
265 B 4 C? 4?2-3 + 18 31 58 Tel Beer Sheba EF-19 1782=1200 16999/1
269 8 room destruct dom?
259 B 4 E simp? 1u 23 44 Tel Beer Sheba B 0-1 1253 15923/1
270 8
258 B 6 C 4C2-3 + 6 1 25 53 Tel Beer Sheba U-4 93 I 1663211
272 8 room? dom?
261 B ? A? 4A2-3 + 6 1d8 32 68 Tel Beer Sheba A-17 832 2293/1
273 8 street publ
253 Bc 2? + 1 46 27 151 Tel BeerSheba MN-16 256=300 14060/1
271 8 room on floor
268 C 1 + 1234 95 Tel Beer Sheba A4 J-13 443 12063/1
269 274 8
C 1 + 1p26 95 Tel Beer Sheba F C-20 1357 6053/1?
275
270 C 1 1d26 98+ Tel Beer Sheba F? G-1 11j5 11511/1
276 10! room publ?
272 C 2 1235 80 Tel Beer Sheba C N-9 2003 dom? 7714/1
277 8? casemate?
273 C 2 + 1245 82 Tel Beer Sheba A1 0-19 292 A 1 A 57 SN.1282
196 8? room house dom
271 C 2 C + 1p25 80 Tel BeerSheba G 0-1 1602=1345 A 1 H 02 SN.670
232 8 cist open area dom?
274 C 3 + 5 45 Tel Beer Sheba G-16 479 A 2 C 08 5:204 SN.1808
204 8? debris
275 C 3 + 5 55 Tel BeerSheba A 2 C 07 7:11 SN.1328
203 8? silo in room dom?
276 C 3 + 5 60 Tel Beer Sheba B4 A-2I3 1261 VI dom A 4 C 01 5:202 SN.2450 PM.32.2778
210 8 cistern house
277 C 3 56 68 Tel Beer Sheba F2 K-8/9 808a 3-2 A 4 B 03 3:10 SN.1332
208 8 room house dom
196 A+ 1? A? 235 25 70 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 0-4 2 A 02 7:21 SN.193
209 8 casmate dom? A 4 B
232 Ac 1 A child 15 120 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 33 1 A 7 B 03 7:13 SN.1383 PM.1.8928
211 8 court house dom A
204 B 1-2 A 0/3A 1d 26 58 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 22 Debris A 7 B 02 3:09 SN.909
212 8 room house dom A

162 163
 11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page
22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont Page b
Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainlfirst) Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev
104 5 Koehavi exe. Holland 1975: pl.42:3. 203 B 2 A 0/3A 1d 24 72 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 13 32 A?
472 * b + Courtesy A Kloner 210 B 2 A 2C?2 + 1 1u7 21 40 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 32 10 A
102 b North Site May 1935 MRMC: pI.26:1n6. 208 B 2 C simp 1 23 50 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 14 3 A
474 fond by Mr.Leon Unpublished 209 B 2 C simp 1d 27 60 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 51 5n A
117 2 + Season 1960 RR2: p1.24:2 211 B 2 G 4?B 1 26 46 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 22 5 A
118 f 1959 disk RR1: pl.5 212 B 2 G 4?B 1u 34 48 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 12 5 A
116 f
119 2*
Harig 1962
1960
RR2: pl.35:2
RR1: pI.24:3-4.
201 B 3 B 3-4B 1p 30 84 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE Debris -
205 B 3-5 A 0/34A 1 1d 27 60 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 32 13 A
120 2 + 1961 RR2: pI.35:1. 202 B 4 A 3A? 1d 20 61 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 23 A
121 f 1960 RR1: pI.24:1. 206 B 4 B 3-4B 1p 31 73 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 04 3 A
122 f 1961 RR2: pl.36:1. 207 B 4 B 3-4B R 1d 28 64 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 22 5 A
123 b 1961 RR2: pI.36:2. 213 B aTI other 1p 22 55 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 14 6 A
113 * b + Found 24.6.92 Courtesy A. De Groot 199 B+ 2 A simp? 5 28 102 Tel Beit-Mirsim A
SE 22 6
112 * b + Found 29.6.92 Courtesy A. De Groot 200 B+ 3-4 A O? 5 28 140 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 21 1 A
114 * f + Courtesy A. De Groot 197 Be 1 B lock? 1 28 158 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 13 pit A2
463 * b + Courtesy A. De Groot 198 Be 2 A simp? 6 28 210 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 13 pit A
578 * f + Courtesy A. De Groot 214 C 1 16 100 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 31 9 A
5n * b + Courtesy A. De Groot 215 C 1 1p23 95 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 31 8 A
115 * f + Courtesy A. De Groot 216 C 1 1d5 A
96 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 32 10
132 * f + Courtesy A. De Groot 218 C 1 1u23 pit A2
105 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 13
310 * b-f + Courtesy A. De Groot 219 C 1 harig 1d78 16 59 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 31 11 A
311 * f + Courtesy A. De Groot 220 C 1 1 90 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 32 12 A
464 * b + Possibly horse Courtesy A. De Groot 217 C 1 C 1 70 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 13 pit A2
309 +464 * b-f + Courtesy A. De Groot 221 C 2 1236 Tel Beit-Mirsim 12 A
68 NW 32
147 f found 18.10.1910 Samaria I: 384, pl.75e 222 C 2 1p5 A
65 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 21 15
293 f? Samaria I: 384, pl.75f 223 C 2 1235 80 Tel Beit-Mirsim 12 A
SE
337 23 Kerkhof 1969: fig.24:5 224 C 2 1u5 80 Tel Beit-Mirsim nw IE gate A
195 1 b-f + Sellin 1927: 206, pl.20i 225 C 2 1u25 41 Tel Beit-Mirsim West Tower A
254 7 g + Unpublished 226 C 2 1235 Tel Beit-Mirsim A
83 NW 21 2
255 P + 7 f + 1971 Unpublished 227 C 2 1d25 46 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 33 debris A?
256 7 f + Unpublished 228 C 2 1d5 60 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 51 8E A
251 P 7 f + Above wall r 193 Unpublished 229 C 2 1d25 41 Tel Beit-Mirsim SE 13 32 A?
481 2* f no 1-4613 Unpublished, ct. no. 251 231 C 3 5 44 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 22 13 A
257 P 7 f + 1969 Unpublished 230 C? 2 necla 15 60 Tel Beit-Mirsim NW 31 6 A
252 PM 5 g + 1969 BS 1: photo 27:2, pl.71:1. 129 A 1 A + 1 1d Tel e-Nasbeh W-13
29 68
267 PB 2 b + 1971 BS 1: photo 27:4. 130 A 1 A + 1 25 50 Tel e-Nasbeh AD-17 R.586 I
470 2 b + 1.4613 Unpublished 490 A 1 A 42 Tel e-Nasbeh AK-21 ci.128
262 P 2 f + 1970 BS 1: photo 27:6. 491 A 1 A ei.152
31 Tel e-Nasbeh AJ-22
266 P AN,+ 7 b + 1973 Unpublished 492 A 1 A 50 Tel e-Nasbeh P-17 ci.216
263 P b + 1970 BS 1: photo 27:5. 493 A 1 A 40 Tel e-Nasbeh P-17 ci.216
264 P 2 b-f + 1971 BS 1: photo 27:9. 494 A 1 A 55 Tel e-Nasbeh AF-20 ci.370 I
260 g BS 1: photo 27:8. 495 A 1 A 62 Tel e-Nasbeh AC-15 534 I
265 7 b + 1974 Unpublished 496 A 1 A I
49 Tel e-Nasbeh AB-16 616
259 PM 7 f + 1972 Unpublished 497 A 1 A 55 Tel e-Nasbeh AB-16 616 I
258 7 9 + Unpublished 498 A 1 A 30 Tel e-Nasbeh AB-17 625a I
261 7 b + 1971 BS 1: photo 27:7. 499 A 1 A Tel e-Nasbeh
253 7? f 1969 Aharoni 1973b:22 photo 5 (H). 500 A 1 A Tel e-Nasbeh
268 7 f + 1972 2 fragments Unpublished 501 A 1 A Tel e-Nasbeh
269 7 f + 1974 Unpublished 502 A 1 A Tel e-Nasbeh
270 7 f + 1974 Unpublished , 503 A 1 A Tel e-Nasbeh
272 P 7 f + 1974 Unpublished 504
.'
A 1 A Tel e-Nasbeh
273 P 7 b + 1970 Unpublished 505 A 1 A Tel e-Nasbeh
271 7 f + 1973 Unpublished 506 A 1 A Tel e-Nasbeh
274 7 + 5=1973 Unpublished 137 A 2 A 1u 38 62 Tel e-Nasbeh AA-18
275 7 + 3=1971 Unpublished 131 A 2 Ap + 1 1u 35 45 Tel e-Nasbeh AC-14 R.566
276 7 + 5=1972? Unpublished 488 A 2-4 A Tel e-Nasbeh
2n P + 7 + 3=1971 Unpublished 489 A 2-4 A Tel e-Nasbeh
196 35? 21.7.1930 TBM 3: 69, pls.31:7; 54b:9. 128 A 3 A 1 1d7 30 45 Tel e-Nasbeh AG-19 Ci. 386
232 PM + 35? 11.5.28. CHILD! TBM 3: pis. 32:1; 57b:4. 133 A 3 A + 1d78 35 68 Tel e-Nasbeh P-17 Ci.216
204 35? 29.6.1932 TBM 3: pI.56:1. 134 A 3 A + 8 1d 35 55 Tel e-Nasbeh AA-14 R.393
203 35? 1930 TBM 3: pls.31:11; 54b:5. 135 A 3 A + 8 1 35 55 Tel e-Nasbeh 0-14 R.239

164 165
 22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page a
22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page b
Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.
~.t Date Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainlfirst)
201 debris A 3 C 05 1:27 SN.881 210 1 f-g + 5.8.1932 TBM 3: pI.56:5.
205 court open dom A 2 H 06 1:10 SN.2105 PM.32.2730 208 35? 24.7.1930 TBM 3: pls.31:14; 54b:2
202 8? A 2 B 01 6:04 SN.1228 209 35? Casemate,15.5.26 TBM 3: pl.57c:1.
206 8 court house dam A 3 D 15 7:12 SN.1019 211 1 26.7.1930 TBM 3: p1.31:3
207 8 room house dam A 3 D 16 6:03 SN.908 212 35? 30.6.1930 TBM 3: pls.31:13; 54:1
213 8 room house dam A 8 A 02 7:10 SN.986 201 35? 27.6.1930 TBM 3: pis. 31:1; 54:6.
199 8 A 2 E 06 4:08 SN.523 205 1 17.7.1932 TBM 3: pI.56:2.
200 8 room dom A 2 H 05 7:28 SN.527 35? 1930 TBM 3: pis. 31:4; 54b:3
202
197 8? pit dam A 3 E 01 4:01 SN.1803 35? 9.7.1930 TBM 3: pls.31:12; 54b:8.
206
198 8? pit dam A 2 C 09 7:14 SN.1468 207 35? 30.6.1930 TBM 3: pls.31:15; 54:4
214 8 room dam? A 10 B 51 SN.543 35? 7.7.1930 TBM 3: pls.31:2; 54:7.
213
215 8 court house dam A 10 B 59 SN.2406 PM.32.2769 28.4.1928 TBM 2: pl.25:9= TBM 3:pI.57c:2
199 35?
216 8 court house dam A 10 B 55 SN.2295 200 35? 1.5.1928 TBM 2: pI.25:10; 3:pl.57c:3.
218 8? pit dam A 10 B 57 SN.1804 197 MP A 35? 23.6.1932 TBM 3: pls.29:12,12a; 56:3.
9
219 8 casm house dam A 12 R 05 5:205 SN.2313 PM.32.2762 198 MP A 35? 30.7.1930 TBM 3: PL.31 :6.
9
220 8 open dom? A 10 B 60 SN.2548 35? 2.5.1928 TBM 3: pl. 57c:5.
214
217 8? pit dom A 10 B 56 SN.1805 PM.32.2697 215 1 f + 2.8.1932? TBM 3: p1.55:6
221 8 open dam? A 10 B 58 SN.2396 216 35? 25.7.1932 TBM 3: p1.55:10
222 8 room house dam A 10 B 63 SN.1119 218 MP A 35? 23.6.1932 TBM 3: pI.55:8.
223 8? A 10 B 53 SN.988 219 1 b + 27.7.1932 TBM 3: pI.56:4.
224 8? court neargate publ? A 10 B 50 SN.29 220 P 35? 29.7.1932 TBM 3: pI.55:9.
225 8? tower publ A 10 B 54 SN.2369 217 MP A 1 f + 23.6.1932 TBM 3: pI.55:11.
226 8 street A 11 48 SN.1544 221 P 35? 1.8.1932 TBM 3: pI.55:7.
227 8? A 10 B 62 SN.2296 222 35? 14.7.1930 TBM 3: pls.31:8; 54b:10.
228 8 room? dam? A 10 B 49 SN.84 223 35? 7.7.1930 TBM 3:pls.31:10; 54:11.
229 8? silo in house dam A 10 B 52 SN.1329 224 35? 5.5.1926 TBM 3: pI.57c:6.
231 8 room house dam A 11 47 SN.1817 35? 29.7.1932 tower! TBM 3: pl.56:8
225 PW
230 8 court house dam A 10 B 61 SN.2004 35? 6.8.1930 TBM 3: pl:31:5
226
129 A 1 A 58 X.13 227 35? 25.7.1932 TBM 3: p1.56:6
130 room dam A 1 A 59 X.26 35? 17.5.1926 TBM 3: pI.57c:7.
228
490 m.224 35? 23.7.1930 TBM 3: pls.31:9; 54b:12.
229
491 m.350 35? 30.6.1932 TBM 3: p1.56:9
231
492 m.887 230 35? 9.7.32, neclace TBM 3: pl.56:7
493 m.995 129 34? Neck collar? TN1: pl.86:10.
494 130 34? TN1: pl.86:11.
495 490 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
496 491 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
497 492 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
498 493 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
499 494 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
500 495 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
501 496 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
502 497 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
503 498 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
504 499 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
505 500 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
506 501 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
137 8-7 dam? A 1 D 05 X.35 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
502
131 7? room or alley dam? A 1 B 07 X.12 503 34? TN1:247, appendix A
488 , 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
504
489 505 34? TN1:247, appendix A
128 7 cist in court dam A 1 C 09 M.2480 PM35.3095 34? TN1:247, appendix A
506
133 7? cist open area dom? A 1 C 05 M.886 PM.31.326 137 34? TN1: pI.86:7.
134 7? room house dam A 1 C 07 M.2338 131 34? TN1: pI.86:5.
135 open A 1 C 08 X4 488 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
136 7-6? open A 1 C 06 M.907 489 34? TN1:247, appendix A
138 7? room house dam A 1 C 09a 1512 PM.32.2507 128 P AN1 1 f + cist329a? TN1: pI.53:18.
140 A 1 D 06 M.2814 PM.35.3219 PI A-2 1 f + 63,seas1929? TN1: p1.86:9
133
139 7? cist open area dam? A 1 J 08 M.988 134 34? TN1: pI.86:2.
127 A 1 J 09 M.577 135 34? Squar 14, not 15 TN1: pI.86:1.
126 7-6? room house dam? A 1 A 60 x11 M.1608 34? TN1: pI.86:4.
136
125 7? cistern A 1 A 61 M.146 P.3436

166 167
 11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page 22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page a

Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Cat Date Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.
Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev
136 A 3 A + 1 1u 30 45 143 out open area A 12 R 08 7:46 M.814 Kansas City
Tel e-Nasbeh AB-25 R.221
138 A 3 A + 17 38 58 167 out A 9 C 01 5:07 M.816
Tel e-Nasbeh AB-25 R.224 I
140 A 4 A + 1d 46 77 Tel e-Nasbeh 158 court house dom A 4 A 06 5:02 M.2851
AB-16
139 A 4 Cp eyes + 1u 40 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 169 8-7 cist room dom A 12 R 06 7:48 M.2544 PM.35.3104
P-17 Ci.216
127 A+ 1 C + 5 30 100 Tel e-Nasbeh 149 7? room or court dom A 2 C 10 5:01 M.690
AH-20
126 Ac 1 A + 28 140 Tel e-Nasbeh 144 7? room or court dom? A 2 A 11 7:47 M.2489 PM.35.3097
125 Ac 1 RS-22 R.369 I
Ap R 1d34 25 160 Tel e-Nasbeh 148 7? room house dom A 2 C 11 5:103 M.2870
AK-23 Ci. 78
143 B 18 42 Tel e-Nasbeh 159 cistern A 2 A 12 3:13 M.120? 1.1708
AG-28 near cave
167 B 1 B simp + 1 1u 27 40 Tel e-Nasbeh 164 7? court house dom A 4 E 06 5:104 M.1550 PM.32.2516
AG-28
158 B 1 C simp? + 1 1d 28 79 Tel e-Nasbeh 160 7? silo dom? A 4 B 4 7:19 M.221
AA-14 R.642
169 B 1- + 8 161 debris A 4 E 05 8:09 M.1072 PM.31.327?
40 Tel e-Nasbeh AF Ci.370
149 B 1-2 A lock? 1 27 53 Tel e-Nasbeh 150 7? room dom? A 2 D 03 5:101 M.2445
R-17 R.161 I
144 B 2 A 2A2 + 1 24 48 Tel e-Nasbeh 151 A 2 D 02 5:102 M.2815
AE-19 R.464 I
148 B 2 A A-3A 7 1p 27 72 Tel e-Nasbeh 152 7? room house dom A 2 D 04 7:39 M.2350
2-15 R.670 I
159 B 2 A simp? 1p 141 room dom A 2 A 08 5:06 M.666, x1 Kansas City
Tel e-Nasbeh C321x2
164 B 2 B 4B2 + 18 32 51 Tel e-Nasbeh 142 8-7? cist room dom A 2 A 09 5:05 M.460
T-14 R.361 I?
160 B 2 C simp? + 1d 26 145 dump A 2 A 10 7:16 M.1454
52 Tel e-Nasbeh AL-23 Si.92
161 B 2 C + 1p 29 76 Tel e-Nasbeh 146 8? open A 2 A 13 7:17 M.1195
SEC74 debris
150 B 2-3 A 3?A2 + 1 30 153 7? cist open area cist A 3 C 06 1:24 M.994
68 Tel e-Nasbeh AFG19 R.438 I
151 B 2-3 A 2-3A 8 28 42 Tel e-Nasbeh 163 7? room house dom A 4 E 07 7:24 M.2535 PM.35.3103
152 B AB-16
2-3 A 2-3A + 1p 28 82 Tel e-Nasbeh 162 dom A 4 B 05 7:18 M.2808 PM.35.3218
2-14 R.398 I
141 B 3 A 3-4A + 1 29 65 Tel e-Nasbeh 154 dump dom A 3 D 18 1:22 M.2419
P-15f R.132
142 B 3 A 3-4A + 1d 32 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 155 A 3 D 17 1:20 M.2759
AJ-20 Ci.159
145 B 3 A 3-4A 1 31 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 156 room house dom A 3 D 19 1:23 M.2845
AB-24 Dump
146 B 3 A 3-4A + 1 1d 30 157 A 3 D 20 1:21 M.2437
80 Tel e-Nasbeh P-14
153 B
163 B
3
3
B
B
3-4B2
4?B23
+
+
1
1
1u
1p
27
33
50 Tel e-Nasbeh
76 Tel e-Nasbeh
P-17
AE-18
Ci.216
R.435
"
I
166
168
7?
8-7
room house?
cistern house
dom
dom?
A
A
9
9
D
A
01
01
7:44
7:43
M.2868
M.1033
162 B 3 C simp? + 1 31 165 7 gate publ A 9 A 02 7:45 M.1698
70 Tel e-Nasbeh AC-17
154 B 4 B 3-4B 1 1u 28 171 tower debris pUbl? A 10 B 64
53 Tel e-Nasbeh AF-17 Dump I
155 B 4 B 3-4B + 1u 34 62 Tel e-Nasbeh 172 8-7? house (room?) dom? A 10 B 67 x.23
AD-19
156 B 4 B 3-4B + 1 1 30 53 Tel e-Nasbeh 507 M.430
2-19 R.633 mixe I
157 B 4 B 3-4B + 1u8 28 47 Tel e-Nasbeh 508
AF-19 I?
166 B 5 A Other + 1 8 52 Tel e-Nasbeh 509
2-15 R.665 I
168 B sr? Other + 1 1 32 58 Tel e-Nasbeh 510
N-17 Ci.176 I
165 B srt + 1 1 30 65 Tel e-Nasbeh 511
T-23 R.273 I
171 C 1 + 1u6 80 Tel e-Nasbeh 512
W-20 R.77
172 C 1 + 1u6 108 Tel e-Nasbeh 513
AL-21 R.23 I?
507 C 1 66 Tel e-Nasbeh 514
ah-20 cl.156
508 C 1 515
Tel e-Nasbeh
509 C 1 516
Tel e-Nasbeh
510 C 1 517
Tel e-Nasbeh
511 C 1 518
Tel e-Nasbeh
512 C 1 519
Tel e-Nasbeh
513 C 1 520
Tel e-Nasbeh
514 C 1 521
Tel e-Nasbeh
515 C 1 522
Tel e-Nasbeh
516 C 1 523
Tel e-Nasbeh
517 C 1 524
Tel e-Nasbeh
518 C 1 525
Tel e-Nasbeh
519 C 1 , 526
Tel e-Nasbeh
520 C 1 527
Tel e-Nasbeh ,,c

521 C 1 528
Tel e-Nasbeh
522 C 1 529
Tel e-Nasbeh
523 C 1 530
Tel e-Nasbeh
524 C 1 531
Tel e-Nasbeh
525 C 1 532
Tel e-Nasbeh
526 C 1 533
Tel e-Nasbeh
527 C 1 534
Tel e-Nasbeh
528 C 1 535
Tel e-Nasbeh
529 C 1 536
Tel e-Nasbeh
530 C 1 537
Tel e-Nasbeh
538

168
169
 11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page
22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page b

Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainlfirst) Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev
138 A1A 1 b-f + Holland 1975: pl.41:3. 531 C 1 Tel e-Nasbeh
140 1 f + TN1: pI.86:8. 532 C 1 Tel e-Nasbeh
139 A-2 34? TN1: p1.86:3 533 C 1 Tel e-Nasbeh
127 34? Eyes Incised? TN1: p1.86:15 534 C 1 Tel e-Nasbeh
126 34? TN1: pl.86:14. 535 C 1 Tel e-Nasbeh
125 P 1 b-f + exhib. no. 362 TN1: pls.46:6; 87:2. 536 C 1 Tel e-Nasbeh
143 16 b Before cave 193 TN1: pl.85:26. 537 C 1 Tel e-Nasbeh
167 34? f Chignon at back TN1: pI.85:17a-b. 538 C 1 Tel e-Nasbeh
158 34? 9 TN1: pI.85:19. 539 C 1 Tel e-Nasbeh
169 PLRW 1 b roc: cist331 ir1 TN1: pls.53:32, 85:28. 173 C 2 1u5 73 Tel e-Nasbeh AH-23
149 34? 9 TN1: pI.85:16. 174 C 2 + 1u5 45 Tel e-Nasbeh SEC74 Debris
144 1 f + Hole in neck TN1: pI.85:27. 175 C 2 + 1 15 58 Tel e-Nasbeh AJ-22 Si.145
148 34? f-g TN1: pI.85:11. 176 C 2 + 1 1u5 85 Tel e-Nasbeh Z-24
159 1 f Sea1928. Kfilut? Unpublished? 177 C 2 + 5 40 Tel e-Nasbeh ZAA18 R.639
164 1 b-f + Season 1932 TN1: pI.85:24. 178 C 2 + 1u25 37 Tel e-Nasbeh AF-26
160 34? f TN1: pI.85:15. 540 C 2 69 Tel e-Nasbeh AD-17 ci.359
161 1 b-f + TN1: pI.85:22. 541 C 2 52 Tel e-Nasbeh AJ-20 R.64
150 34? 9 TN1: pI.85:9. 542 C 2 87 Tel e-Nasbeh Y-24 R.104
151 34? TN1: p1.85:10 543 C 2 32 Tel e-Nasbeh R-17 si.249
152 34? Mold not=a2d2-3 TN1: pI.85:12. 544 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
141 16 b reg. 33-031'3 TN1: p1.85:25 545 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
142 PWM A-3 34? f Season 1927 TN1: pls.47:10= 85:13. 546 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
145 34? b TN1: pI.85:14. 547 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
146 34? TN1: pI.85:18. 548 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
153 A-2 34? TN1: pI.85:8. 549 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
163 1 b-f + TN1: pI.85:21. 550 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
162 1 f + TN1: pl.85:23. 551 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
154 34? f TN1: pI.85:7. 552 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
155 34? f TN1: pI.85:4. 553 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
156 34? 9 TN1: pI.85:6. 554 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
157 34? f Only Face TN1: pI.85:5. 555 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
166 34? TN1: p1.85:2 556 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
168 PL 34? Veil holder TN1: pls.50:13; 85:1. 557 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
165 34? b Veil holder TN1: pI.85:3. 558 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
171 34? TN1: pls.74:5 up left; 86:17. 559 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
172 34? TN1: pI.86:16. 560 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
507 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) 561 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
508 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) 562 C 2 Tel e-Nasbeh
509 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn) 179 C 2 D disk 56 70 Tel e-Nasbeh AJ-20 Ci.159
510 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn) 170 C 3 5 48 Tel e-Nasbeh AJ-20 Ci.159
511 34? TN1:247, appendix A 563 C 3 43 Tel e-Nasbeh P-22 surface
512 34? TN1 :247, appendix A 564 C 3 38 Tel e-Nasbeh X-22 surface
513 34? TN 1:247, appendix A 565 C 3 70 Tel e-Nasbeh Z-13 surface
514 34? TN1:247, appendix A 566 C 3 69 Tel e-Nasbeh Z-13 surface
515 34? TN1 :247, appendix A 567 C 3 44 Tel e-Nasbeh Z-13 surface
516 34? TN1:247, appendix A 568 C 3 Tel e-Nasbeh AG-17 dump
517 34? TN1 :247, appendix A 569 C 3 51 Tel e-Nasbeh AJ-20 R.64
518 34? TN1:247, appendix A 570 C 3 90 Tel e-Nasbeh 0-17 R.136
519 34? TN1:247, appendix A 571 C 3 25 Tel e-Nasbeh 0-16 R.137
520 34? TN1 :247, appendix A 572 C 3 69 Tel e-Nasbeh 0-17 R.138
521 34? TN1:247, appendix A 573 C 3 61 Tel e-Nasbeh 0-16 R.146 I
522 34? TN1:247, appendix A 574 C 3 Tel e-Nasbeh X-13 R.346 I
523 34? TN1:247, appendix A 575 C 3 85 Tel e-Nasbeh AB-14 R.390 I
524 34? TN1:247, appendix A 576 C 3 62 Tel e-Nasbeh AG-19 R.438 I
525 34? TN1:247, appendix A 180 C 3 5 50 Tel e-Nasbeh AJ-20 Ci.159
526 34? TN1:247, appendix A 181 A+ 1 A 245 Tel e-Safi
527 34? TN1:247, appendix A 483 B 3 A? 4?1 1d 32 70 Tel el Muleiha
528 34? TN1:247, appendix A 184 Ac 1 A + + 33 145 Tel el-Areini
529 34? TN1 :247, appendix A 187 8 1 C simp 1d Tel el-Areini A 6-5
530 34? TN1 :247, appendix A 189 8 1 C simp? 1u Tel el-Areini A 45?
531 34? TN1 :247, appendix A 186 8 2 8 48 1d Tel el-Areini A VI

170 171
 22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page a
22 February 1996 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page b
Cat Date Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.
Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainlfirst)
539
532 34? TN1:247, appendix A
173 A 10 C 11 M.175
533 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
174 debris A 10 B 68 M.775
534 34? TN1:247, appendix A
175 silo open area dom? A 10 C 10 M.333
535 34? TN1:247, appendix A
176 A 10 B 65 x.48
536 34? . TN1:247, appendix A
177 room dom? A 10 B 66 x.35
537 34? TN1:247, appendix A
178 A 10 A 10 M.870
538 34? TN1:247, appendix A
540
539 34? TN1:247, appendix A
541 M.310
173 34? TN1: pI.86:12.
542 M.577
174 + 34? TN1: p1.86:21
543
175 34? TN1: pI.86:20.
544
176 34? TN1: pl.86:19
545
177 34? TN1: p1.86:13
546
178 34? TN1: pI.86:22.
547
540 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
548
541 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
549
542 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
550
543 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
551
544 34? TN1:247, appendix A
552
545 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
553
546 34? TN1:247, appendix A
554
547 34? TN1:247, appendix A
555
548 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
556
549 34? TN1:247, appendix A
557
550 34? TN1:247, appendix A
558
551 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
559
552 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
560
553 34? TN1:247, appendix A
561
554 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
562
555 34? TN1:247, appendix A
179 B-7? cist room dom A 1 G 04 M.464
556 34? TN1:247, appendix A
170 8-7? cist room dom A 11 55 M.463
557 34? TN1:247, appendix A
563 x5
558 34? TN1:247, appendix A
564 x22
559 34? TN1:247, appendix A
565 x62
560 34? TN1:247, appendix A
566 x85
561 34? TN1:247, appendix A
567 x90 562 34? TN1 :247, appendix A
568 x12
179 C3 34? Disk TN1: pI.47:13.
569 x7 M311
170 A 34? TN1: pI.47:11.
570 M759
563 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
571 M698
564 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
572 M719
565 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
573 M689
566 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
574 x5
567 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
575 x55 M.85
568 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
576 x12a
569 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
180 8-7? cist room dom A 11 54 M.459
570 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
181 A 1 A 63
571 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
483 surface IAA 55-11
572 34? TN1 :247, appendix A (+Zorn)
184 A 1 A 06a 264? IAA6,Q-725
573 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
187 9-7? A 4 A 01 5:03
574 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
189 7? A 4A 02 5:04
575 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
186 A 3 A 01 4:04
576 34? TN1:247, appendix A (+Zorn)
185 Per? A 2 H 02 3:05
180 C3 Bad photo TN1: pI.47:12.
188 9? A 3 F 01 1:08 26 IAA59-308 181 Bliss & Macalister 1902:fig.51
190 A 11 10
483 2 f-g + surface find Unpublished
192 7-6? surface dom? 122
184 5 + Holland 1975: pl.41:1.
191 7? tomb tomb
187 9 Yeivin 1961: pI.2:3:2 left (H)
193 8-7? silo dom? 7:09 61
189 Yeivin 1961: p1.2: 3:left (H)
194 8-7? silo dom? 142
186 Ciasca 1962: pI.9:10.
235 IR2 A 4A 04 7:03
185 Romema? Moscati 1964:5f; Patai 1967:66
234 IR2 A 3 F 02 7:07 P.1094

172 173
 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont. Page a
11 March 1996 Appendix 1: Pillar Figurines by Sites Page 22 February 1996

Cat Date Context1 Cont2 H 01 la nd Engle Field Reg. Museum Reg.

Cat T1 T2 T3 Locks S C B Break Hh Hal Site Fld Square Locus Lev 1:30 P.63
233 IR2 A 3 D 10
185 8 3 A 5A2! + 1d Tel el-Areini A A 12 8 01 7:08 P.55
236 IR2
188 8 3 8 482-4 1 Tel el-Areini A VI 237 IR2 A 10 8 46
190 C 3 5 Tel el-Areini 1962/1 IAA85-448
183 8
192 A 1 A 1 20 42 Tel el-Ful 1-41 roomE 3b storeroom publ 2436/1
182 8
191 Ac 1 A 2346 Tel el-Ful Tomb? surface
239
193 8 2 A 1-2A2 + 1d 21 60 Tel el-Ful Mi XVIII Si39 43a room on floor sac?
238 8
194 C 2 + 1u25 65 Tel el-Ful Mi XVIII Si38 43a out glacis 773/1
248 7
235 8 1 C simp 1u 30 42 Tel el-Judeida 7 storeroom publ? 4539/1
245
234 8 3 8 483 + 1 1d7 31 82 Tel el-Judeida 7 publ? 4623/1
249
233 8 3-4 8 482? 1p 30 65 Tel el-Judeida out glacis 776/1
246
236 8 4? A? 4A?12 + 1 2345 29 115 Tel el-Judeida 7 room house publ? 4021/1
247
237 C 1 3 1 125 Tel el-Judeida 471 dom? 4572
183 8e 3 8? 482 25 30 86 Tel el-Dreme C? 555 II casmate 4548/1
250
182 C 2 1235 35 Tel el-Dreme D R-17f 683 II room dom? 983/3
240
239 8 1 Tel Halif/ Lahav A Surface street 3646/1
241 7
238 8 3 8 2-382 1u Tel Halifl Lahav IV G.8005 6b 1547/1
242 7
248 8 2-3 A? 5A2 + 1 1u 26 42 Tel Ira E 152 7-6 1094/1
243 7?
245 8 3 8 5+82 + 1u 30 50 Tel Ira E 574 7 1460/1 IAA 75-902
244 7 court liv.laye
249 8 3-4 A? 4+A1 + 1u8 28 44 Tel Ira E 591 7-6 6414/1 IAA90-728
482 PER silo open area
246 8 4 D? 4D? + 1p8 26 60 Tel Ira E 159 A 10 8 69
280 9?
247 8 4? simp? + 1d 26 65 Tel Ira E 191 7
471 C 2 1d5 Tel Ira 1580
250 C 3 + 5 66 Tel Ira E 526 ?
240 A 1 Ap 1d 22 40 Tel Masos G 602
241 A 4 A + 1d 38 85 Tel Masos G F-9 778 3
242 8 3 + 1d 28 78 Tel Masos G F-5 741 4
243 C 2 1u5 56 Tel Masos D? 612
244 C 3 5 48 Tel Masos G F-7 708 2
482 8 2 C simp? 1p 21 70 Tel Michal A F-15 955 6
280 C 2 D? objec Tel Qasila ? 8

174 175
 Appendix A: Pillar Figurines - Cont.
22 February 1996 Page b
Appendix 2: Catalogue of Judean Pillar Figurines
Cat Lfind Fgrp Place PrS Pc Notes Bibliography (mainlfirst)
1. A whole figurine of type Be from Deir el Azhar, near Abu 7. A whole figurine of type BC.3.b from a tomb near
188 5 9 Pointed hat Moscati 1964: p1.8. Bethlehem. The head and the upper body are covered with
Ghosh. It was broken and mended after discovery. The hair
190 Ciasca 1963: p1.20:2 red paint or slip. The hair and the area around the eyes show
or headdress appears like a veil around the face (Abel
192 Lapp 1981: pis. 32:4, 16.
1921:100). Holland (1975: vol. I:105, 193) defined it as his traces of blue paint. Mitchell (1988) thought that it is a
191 5? Macalister1915:35, pI.1:1.
type A8, but possibly it is only a badly worn figurine with a fertility figurine, which could not have belonged to someone
193 P? "pre IIIb" Lapp 1981: pI.32:1,13.
common, curly hairdress. who really believed in Yahweh, thus its owner was pagan.
194 P "pre IIIb" Lapp 1981: pI.32:2,4.
Bliss & Mac.1902: pI.68:6. Context and date: The figurine was found in a hewn tomb Context and date: The figurine was dated to the 7th century,
235
234 1 + "hat" Bliss & Macalister1902: 68:8 with burial benches, typical of the Iron Age II. It seems that since it was seen as a "forbidden" cult object and related to
9
233 1 Bliss & Macalister1902: 68:7 there is pottery of the 7th century BC (Abel 1921: pI. 2), but the Josiah's reform (Tubb 1980:14). The tomb can be dated
236 1 Bliss & Macalister1902: 68:10 exact dating is not certain. to the 8th-7th centuries BC (for the pottery see Mitchell
237 C, and not E? Bliss & Macalister1902: 68:9 Literature: Abel 1921; Pritchard 1943: type VII:208; Holland 1988:73).
183 5 9 + lev 6.88 North Fritz 1990: pI.102:1, taf.42a 1975: AlIl.c.1; Engle 1979: typeVII:27. Note: Clermont-Ganneau (1884) had doubts about the origin
182 P f North gate13.36 Fritz 1990: pI.102:2. of this figurine, without indicating Why. But since it was found
239 2? Courtesy O. Borowski at a very early date (it was presented to the British Museum
2. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Ashdod. It has a
238 PAl 2 Seger 1992. in 1865), there is no reason to doubt that it is authentic.
red painted band on the neck. Hachlili compared this head to
248 7 + Kletter in press A: nO.5
heads from Ramat Rahel (Ashdod II-III: 131). Place: British Museum, London.
245 7 + K1etter in press A: nO.1
Context and date: locus 1075 near the large pit (1076) of Literature: Clermont-Ganneau 1884:224; Barnett 1968: fig.
249 7 + Kletterin press A: no.3
246 7 + K1etter in press A: nO.2 levels 1-2. This area was not well defined, but was perhaps 17a; Holland 1975: vol. 1:62, 186, Atll.c.t: Engle 1979: type
247 7 + K1etter in press A: nO.4 an alley between domestic buildings. According to the list of 11:7; Tubb 1980; Mitchell 1988:73.
471 courtesy Y. Beit Arieh loci, it is a mixed locus (Ashdod 11-111:120).
250 7 + K1etter in press A: nO.6 Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 65:11, reg. no. 1035/1; Holland 8. A whole figurine of type AC.1.a from tomb 5 in Beth
240 Masos 1: pl.11 0:4. 1975: A.l.a.1. Shemesh. It is exceptional, since there are no breasts, thus
241 Hat Masos 1: pl.11 0:2. it was explained as a man (with Semitic facial features,
242 Masos 1: pl.11 0:3. Mackenzie 1912:76).
3. An unidentified body part from Bethel. Either a
243 Masos 1: pl.11 0:6ab. Context and date: the figurine was found, together with a
Photograph or a drawing was not published.
244 PO + Masos 1: pI.111:5.
Context and date: The locus was not specified, and the group of pottery vessels, in the left back part of tomb 5. This
482 b-f Kertesz 1989: 361
excavators had not defined phases within the Iron Age tomb was dated to the 8th-6th centuries BC (ibid; also
280 Mazar 1951: 206f, fig.13c
period in this site. Holland 1975: vol. 1:71), but seems to belong mainly to the
Notes: figurines 3-6 from Bethel appear, together with 8th century BC.
another fragment, as Holland's (1975) nos. AX1.2-5, without Note: this figurine may have portrayed a rider (?) or a
a further separation. They cannot be classified with any woman holding a drum that was broken away (?).
certainty, since almost no details are given by the Place: Rockefeller P.444, exhibition no. 361.
excavators. The added fragment does not belong to the JPF Literature: Mackenzie 1912:76-77, pis. 41:10; 42; Holland
(it is Holland's AXI."3", today in the Rockefeller Museum, 1975: vol. 1:71f, 178, type Al.a.4.
reg. no. PM.35.442).
Literature: Kelso 1968:116, index no. 40, 83, #331; Holland 9. A head and upper body part of type A+.1.A from tomb 5 in
1975: AXI."2". Beth Shemesh. Remains of white-wash are still visible on
the neck, and perhaps there is paint on the eyes.
4. An unidentified body part from Bethel. Reg. no. 467. Context and date: It was found on the left burial bench. For
Context and date: locus 120 in area II, an unclear area on the dating cf. figurine no. 8 above.
the southern edge of the excavations (see note to figurine Note: Mackenzie suggested that figurines 8 and 9 form a
no. 3 above). pair, perhaps of protective divinities (but he also mentioned
Literature: Kelso 1968:83, #331; Holland 1975: AXI."4". magic and the biblical teraphim as well, 1912:83-84).
Literature: Mackenzie 1912:76f, pis. 41:9; 42; Holland
5. A torso called "Astarte" from Bethel. Reg. no. 1011, from 1975:71, type Al.a.5.
season 1954. [Fig. 4:1, where the lower body is restored].
Context and date: It was found in area VI, but the locus was
not specified (see note to figurine no. 3 above). 10. A head and upper body part of type A+.1.Ah from cistern
Literature: Kelso 1968:88, #355; Holland 1975: AXI."5". 25 in Beth Shemesh.
Context and date: the pottery assemblage of cistern 25 was
. 6. A body part of type C.2 from Bethel. Reg. no. 59. The related to level lie and dated to the 8th-6th centuries Be. It
excavators defined it as a "typical Iron Age II figurine", includes a Imlk stamp and other 8th century BC pottery types
without any further description. (AS III: map 1, 62-63; AS V:74-75). The cistern is situated in
Context and date: "north of 3", perhaps north of locus 3. If an open area near the junction of two alleys, in area V34,
so, it is area I, from the Roman - Byzantine periods (see and it may have been a public cistern.
note to figurine no. 3 above). Place: Haverford?
Literature: Kelso 1968:83, pI. 45:15; Holland 1975: AX.b1. Note: figurine no. 29 was found in the same cistern.
Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:36; AS V:156; Holland 1975:77, type
Al.a.6.

176 177
11. A whole figurine of type Bc.4.B from room 366 in Beth
Shemesh.
Context and date: room 366, a section of a cobbled floor in
area S54. Probably it is a domestic floor, since a dyeing
installation was found nearby (AS III: 69-70, map 1). The
locus is mixed, as is usual for this excavation (even a
Philistine shard was ascribed to it, reg. no. 4-208). Holland
(1975:73) defined it as part of house 6 with loci 366 and 343,
where figurines nos. 20, 30 were found. The figurine may be
dated to the 8th century BC, since remains of the 7th century
BC are scanty in Beth Shemesh (except tomb 14 and some
finds from the new excavations).
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS 111:69-70, pI. 23 lower right, map 1; Wright
1943:16 fig. 7; Pritchard 1943: type VII:216; Holland
1975:77, type AlIl.d.3.
12. A whole figurine of type Bc.4.A from Beth Shemesh. It
has five rows of little curls and three bands of red and yellow
paint on its neck. The face and hair show traces of dark red
paint. The base is concave.
Context and date: it was found in the area of the "high
place", near the southern gate area.
Place: Rockefeller P.400, exhibition no. 373.
Notes: it was not published in the report (cf. figurine no. 34
below). The card of the Rockefeller museum carries a reg.
no., 3rd.A.S.12.xxxix, probably meaning the third season of
1912.
Literature: unpublished (?). I could not locate this figurine in
Holland's or Engle's studies.
13. A whole figurine of type BC.3.B from tomb 1 in Beth
Shemesh. Mackenzie noted remains of paint, and thought
that the hair style is Egyptian (1912:54). He explained this
figurine as Astarte, but it was called a male god in the plate
(ibid: pI. 22).
Context and date: Mackenzie (1912:57ff) dated the tomb by
lamps. Wright (AS V:77) and Holland (1975:71) suggested a
10th-9th century BC dating, but the tomb was certainly used
in the 8th centuryBC, and an exact date of the figurine itself
cannot be established.
Note: figurine no. 15 was found in the same tomb.
Literature: Mackenzie 1912: 52ff, pis. 22:9; 23; Pritchard
1943: type VII:203; Pritchard 1954; Patai 1967:70 photo 8,
center right; Holland 1975: type AlIl.c.2.
14. A hand-made head of type A1 from room 374 in Beth
Shemesh (Season 1933). The photograph is bad and the
exact shape of the head is not clear.
Context and date: Holland ascribed this head to house 5,
with rooms nos. 342, 369-375, 385. There are two loci with
the no. 374 (AS III: map 1). One is a narrow, probably
domestic room or alley between rooms 375 and 370; the
other is more to the east and its nature is not clear. For the
dating cf. figurine no. 11 above.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS 111:68-69, 85; AS IV: pI. 51:35; AS V:156;
Holland 1975: Al.a3.
15. A head of type B.3.B from tomb 1 in Beth Shemesh. It
was not described, but just published in a photograph.
178
Note: figurine no. 11 was found in the same tomb.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: Mackenzie 1912: pI. 23 left; Holland 1975:77, type
AlIl.c.3; Engle 1979: type 11.1.
16. A head of type B.3.B from room 383 in Beth Shemesh
(season 1933).
Context and date: room 383 is part of building 384+376+383
(AS 111:65, map. 1; house no. 3 of Holland). It was ascribed
to level I, or final level II, but pottery from this room was not
published.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS 111:65, pI. 24:5.5; AS IV: pI. 51:21; Pritchard
1943: Vllla:277; Holland 1975: type All.a.1; Engle 1979:
type VII:29.
17. A head of type B.1-2.A from room 373 in Beth Shemesh
(season 1933).
Context and date: room 373 in area S.32 may have
belonged to building 373+374, but also to street 379. For
the date cf. figurine no. 11 above.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS III: pI. 25: fifth line, 3; AS IV: pI. 51:31;
Holland 1975: type All.c.2; Engle 1979: type VII:30.
18. Ahead of type B.1-2.A from Beth Shemesh (season
1928).
Context and date: the "temple" - a large public building of the
Iron Age II in the western part of the site. Exact location was
not recorded, and the finds from the building are very
disturbed by materials from earlier levels. Holland (1975:70)
called the house "a governor's house".
Note: according to Grant (1929:107), two heads with similar
"beak" faces were found in the "temple". He probably meant
my type A1 heads, but such were never published, or were
published without an identification of their context.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: Grant 1929:65 upper row, fifth from the right; 97
upper right, no. 201; Holland 1975:70, type All.c.3 (and not
All.c.2); Engle 1979: VII:25.
19. A head of type B.3? from Beth Shemesh. The
photograph is somewhat blurred.
Context and date: it was found in the city north of the south
gate, but further details were not published.
Note: this is probably head no. P.411 in the Rockefeller
museum, which has three rows without curls above the
forehead.
Place: Rockefeller?
Literature: Mackenzie 1912: pI. 13b:j; Holland 1975: type
All.g.1; Engle 1979: type 1:25.
[Fig. 6:1]
20. A head and upper body part of type B+.4.A from room
343 in Beth Shemesh (season 1933). The head has four
ridges above the forehead, but it is not clear if all have curls.
Context and date: room 343, from area S34 (Holland's house
no. 6). A tabun and domestic pottery were found in this room
(AS III: 73, map 1). For the date cf. figurine no. 11 above.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS III: pI. 28: 22; AS IV: pI. 51:23; Pritchard 1943:
type Vlla:276; Holland 1975: type All.h.1; Engle 1979: type
VII:31.
21. A head of type B.1.A from Beth Shemesh (season 1930).
The photograph and the drawing are both not good, and I
have followed Holland's classification, though the details are
far from clear.
Context and date: only the general area is known, S.32,
where domestic buildings and alleys were excavated.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS I: pI. 27: 2nd row 2nd from the left; AS II: pI.
21; Holland 1975: type AII.L1; Engle 1979: type VII:5.
22. A head of type B.3.B from room 402 in Beth Shemesh
(season 1933). According to the description it has three
'coils' at the backside (?).
Context and date: room 402 was dated to level III of the Iron
Age 1, but including the 10th century BC. Yet, the room was
mixed with pottery from level lIa (AS IV:155f, n. 28; AS
111:60). Even though, Holland (1975: vol. 1:68) took this head
as proof for an early beginning of the pillar-figurines.
Note: two photographs of this figurine were published, and
Holland thought that there were two different figurines.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS III: pI. 22:6 row 2; AS IV: pI. 51:32, 155f;
Holland 1975: AlIl.b.1 = All.e.3; Engle 1979: type VIII:23.
23. A head of type B.2.A from room 380 in Beth Shemesh
(season 1933).
Context and date: this room belonged to building
379+388+380, partly excavated in the season of 1930 (?). It
contained a rich assemblage, but mixed as usual: a Imlk
stamp, a scarab of Amenophis III, and a fragment of figurine
no. 4-90 (for which nothing else is told in the report).
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS III: 66f; AS IV: pI. 51:33; Holland 1975:185,
typeAII.e.1; Engle 1979: typeVII:6.
24. A head of type B.4.B from Beth Shemesh (season 1929).
Context and date: the head was found in debris in the
cemetery area. It was either related to the tombs, or thrown
out of the city wall and rolled down the slope.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:34; Holland 1975: type AlIl.d.3;
Engle 1979: type VI:38.
25. A head of type B.4.B from room 378 in Beth Shemesh
(season 1933).
Context and date: room 378 was not described in the
reports. Following the map in AS III, it is an open area,
perhaps a court or part of an alley in building 377+381. In
any case, it is a domestic area. The pottery that was
published from this room does not help to date it exactly
(lamp 4-237 and juglet 4-241). For the date cf. figurine no.
11 above.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS III: pI. 25: fifth line, 4; AS IV: pI. 51:22;
Pritchard 1943: no. 261; Holland 1975:72, 187, type
AlIl.d.2; Engle 1979: type 1:37.
179
26. A head of type B.4.B from room 42 in Beth Shemesh
(season 1931).
Context and date: this room appears as an alley or long
room on the map (AS I: pI. 24), but the head was only
mentioned as "reg. no. 96, under I", i.e., under the Arab -
Byzantine level I.
Note: the photograph was first published by Holland.
Place: Rockefeller, i.10504.
Literature: AS 11:32, no. 96; Holland 1975: vol. 11:84, pI. 41:7,
AlIl.d.4a.
27. A head of type B.3? from Beth Shemesh (season 1933).
Context and date: this head does not appear in the register
of finds (AS 111:85), and its origin is surface or debris without
stratigraphy. I could not locate it in Holland's thesis.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS III: fig. 4, reg. no. 33-3-4; Engle 1979: type
1:32.
28. A head of type B.3? from Beth Shemesh.
Context and date: unknown. It only appears in the register of
finds (AS 111:96).
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS III:reg. no. 33-3-110; Engle 1979: type 1:31.
29. A body of type C.1 from cistern 25 in Beth Shemesh
(season 1933). Its right arm is missing. Two figurines were
found in this cistern - for the context and date cf. figurine no.
10 (above).
Place: Haverford?
Note: Holland (1975: vol. 1:68) ascribed this figurine to level
III, but this is a mistake.
Literature: AS 111:62-63, reg. no. 33-4-62, map 1; AS IV: pI.
51:29; AS V: 74-75; Pritchard 1943: type VII:201; Holland
1975: type AX.b.4.
30. A body of type C.1 from Beth Shemesh (season 1933).
Context and date: the locus is not clear, only a general area
"A1". It is a domestic area in the northern part of the
excavations. The body was dated to level II, not III (thus
Holland).
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:24; Pritchard 1943: type VII:202;
Holland 1975: vol. 1:68,72, type AX.b.5.
31. A body of type C.1 from Beth Shemesh (season 1929).
Context and date: the locus was not specified.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:30; Pritchard 1943: VII:200; Holland
1975: vol. 1:68, AX.b.3.
32. A body of type C.1 from room 305 in Beth Shemesh.
Context and date: this room appears in the center of the
1933 excavation area, disturbed by the wall of the later Arab
cemetery. It formed part of a building 305+302 (house 7 of
Holland) from level II (AS III: map 1). Some pottery from this
room was published, but does not enable an exact dating
(AS 111:82, pI. 25).
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS III: pI. 25 bottom center, reg. no. 33-3-95;
Holland 1975: vol. 1:73, type A.X.b.2.
33. A body of type C.1 from Beth Shemesh (season 1929).
Either a Photograph or a drawing was not published, It was
described as having the hands supporting the breasts and a
concave base.
Context and date: "III north", reg. no. 1027. That would be
final level lIa (AS V:15), dated to the 10th century BC. An
exact locus is unknown
Note: the finds from Grant's excavations are usually mixed;
Wright separated the phases of only one area (that of 1933),
but after the end of the excavations.
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS 11:320; Holland 1975: type AX.b.6.
34. A moulded head of type B+.2.D? from Beth Shemesh. It
has simple side-locks and three ridges with two rows of curls
above the forehead. The nose is damaged and the facial
features are worn. Only part of one hand beneath the breast
was left from the body.
Context and date: unknown.
Place: Rockefeller PA06.
Note: The figurine carries a number "AS.12.X.i", indicating
that it probably came from Mackenzie's season 1912 in Ain
Shems. It is not similar to any other figurine published in his
reports, and was probably never published (cf. the case of
figurine no. 112 below).
Literature: not yet published (?).
35. A body of type C from room 374 in Beth Shemesh
(season 1933). Either a drawing or a photograph was not
published. It is impossible to classify this figurine clearly.
Context and date: the register mentioned a figurine nos. 33-
4-209 from room 374, but without any further details. This
room forms part of a large building with rooms 342+
370+371+374 (Holland's house 1), but the same number
appears also as a floor in an alley nearby (AS III: map 1).
Place: Haverford?
Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975:1:73, type AXI.8.
Note: a few other fragments from Beth Shemesh cannot be
classified exactly. Holland included them as miscellaneous
in his work, and this may indeed be the best option. The few
known details concerning these fragments are listed below:
A A Woman with bands of paint on the neck. Reg. no. 916.,
season 1929. Height: 115 mm. Context: unknown. Literature:
AS 11:19; Holland 1975: P.l.a.2.
B. A Woman, fragmented, with incisions on the front. Reg.
no. 881, season 1929. Height: 115 mm. Context: debris near
Mackenzie's cemetery. Literature: AS 11:24; Holland 1975:
P.l.a.3.
C. Reg. no. 33-4-438, season 1933. Context: room 338 in a
house. Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.LaA.
D. Reg. no. 33-4-184, season 1933. Height: 99 mm.
Context: alley 379 in a house. Literature: AS 111:96; Holland
1975: P.l.a.5.
E. Reg. no. 33-4-89, season 1929. Height: 50 mm. Context:
debris near Mackenzie's cemetery. Literature: AS 11:24;
Holland 1975: P.La.6.
F. Reg. no. 883, season 1933. Height: 53 mm. Context:
alley 379. Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.La.7.
36. A whole figurine type Bc.2-3.A from Gezer. It was called
a Phoenician Astarte by the excavator. The neck was broken
and mended after discovery.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Gezer 11:418, fig. 502; Pilz 1924: no. 18;
Watzinger 1933: photograph 96 or 98; Pritcahrd 1943:
VII:210; Holland 1975: vol 1:185, type All.eA; Engle 1979:
1:34.
[Fig. 4:2).
37. A moulded head of type B.3.D from Gezer. I follow
Holland's classification, but the drawing in the report may be
inaccurate.
Context and date: not specified.
Literature: Gezer 11:418; Gezer III: pI. 221:22; Pilz 1924:
c.d.81; Pritcahrd 1943: no. 266; Holland 1979: AV.a.1;
Engle 1979: type 1:29.
38. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Gezer. I follow
Holland's classification, but the drawing may be inaccurate.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:21; Pilz 1924: c.d.80; Pritcahrd
1943: no. 265; Holland 1975: AIILd.3; Engle 1979: type 1:28.
39. A moulded head of type B.2.B from Gezer. I follow
Holland's classification, but the drawing may be inaccurate.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Gezer 11:418; Gezer III: pI. 221 :20; Pilz 1924:
c.d.79; Pritcahrd 1943: no. 264; Holland 1975: AIILd.2;
Engle 1979: type VII:2.
40. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Gezer.
Context and date: unknown.
Note: despite the huge extent of excavations, this is the only
hand-made JPF head known from Gezer so far.
Literature: Gezer 11:233, fig. 382:7; Holland 1975:102,
Al.a.7.
41. A body of type C.1 from cave 1.8 at Gezer.
Context and date: the cave appears on the plan (Gezer III:
plan 1), but its nature is not clear. The excavator defined it
as a tomb, re-used as a cistem. Many pottery vessels were
found inside it, similar to the assemblage of levels "Semitic
3-4". A pile of human bones was found as well. The
mentioning of thin green wares may indicate "Assyrian"
pottery, but there are no drawings to prove this.
Literature: Gezer I: 81f; Gezer III: pI. 28:18; Pilz 1924:
c.a.71; Pritcahrd 1943: no. 211; Holland 1975:102, AX.b.7.
42. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from
the pool at Gibeon. The neck and the upper chest are
painted with horizontal bands of red and yellow. Four yellow
lines indicate fingers of the right hand. The face is covered in
yellow, except the eyes and the nose. The back of the
figurine was left bare. The placing of the left arm is
exceptional, at the upper side of the left breast.
Note: the date and nature of the pool are discussed in
chapters III, VIII (above). For Gibeon in the late Iron Age cf.
also Eshel, H. 1987.
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: 15, pI. 39:420; Holland 1975:
Al.a.16.
43. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at
Gibeon. The upper part of the head is flattened and
protrudes backwards.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: pI. 41:439; Holland 1975: Al.a.8.
44. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at
Gibeon. The upper part of the head is flattened and
protrudes backwards. Remains of red and orange paint.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: pI. 41:290; Holland 1975: Al.a.9.
45. A hand-made head and upper body part of type A+.1.A
from the pool at Gibeon. The figure held a disc with its right
hand, close to the chest.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: 16, fig. 41:557; Holland 1975:
ALa.10.
46. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at
Gibeon. The upper part protrudes backwards.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia. Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:503;
Holland 1975: ALa.11.
47. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at
Gibeon. The head is pointed at the top. Dark, red painted
bands appear below and above the nose.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41: 382; Holland 1975: Al.a.12.
48. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at
Gibeon. The head is pointed at the top. It has remains of red
paint above the neck, and red and yellow bands under the
nose.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:427; Holland 1975: Al.a.13.
49. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at
Gibeon. The upper part protrudes backwards. There are
remains of red paint below the nose.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:462; Holland 1975: Al.a.14.
50. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from the pool at
Gibeon.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:441; Holland 1975: Al.a.15.
51. A hand-made head of type A4.A from the pool at
Gibeon. Only the upper part remained. There is a hat with a
folded tassel, covered with white-wash and yellow paint.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:312; Holland 1975: vol. 1:180f,
Al.d.1.
52. A hand-made head of type A4.A from the pool at
Gibeon. The upper part is covered with white-wash. There is
a folded tassel, but only a little fraction from the face
survived. The hat was made separately and applied to the
head.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:86; Holland 1975: vol. 1:80,
Al.d.2.
[Fig. 5:5).
53. A hand-made head of type A6.A from the pool at
Gibeon. It is exceptional: the face is elongated and narrow,
with a suggestion of a mouth. There is kind of a "bun"
(collected hair?) on the back side. Shallow groves at the
sides of the head were possibly used to applie a hat.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 41:438; Holland 1975: vol. 1:181,
Al.f.1.
54. A moulded head of type B.3.A from the pool at Gibeon.
The head is covered with white-wash and yellow paint.
Place: Philadelphia.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:381; Holland 1975: All.a.2;
Engle 1979: type 1:39.
55. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from the pool at Gibeon.
The head is covered with white-wash and remains of red
paint on the face and neck.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Amman.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:527; Holland 1975: All.c.4;
Engle 1979: type V:201.
56. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from the pool at Gibeon.
It is covered with white-wash and remains of red paint.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:548; Holland 1975: All.c.5;
Engle 1979: type V:203.
57. A moulded head of type B from the pool at Gibeon. The
part above the face did not survive, but there is something
left of the side-locks.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).

180 181
Place: Philadelphia.
Notes: According to Holland, this head has 2-3 rows of curls
and a pointed hat, but the curls do not appear in the
photograph. I cannot see any reason why Engle defined this
head as 'foreign'.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:87; Holland 1975: All.e.5;
Engle 1979: type VIII:24.
58. A moulded head of type B.3.A from the pool at Gibeon.
The head is covered with white-wash and red paint.
According to Holland, it has three rows of small curls, but
these are not clear in the photograph.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:422; Holland 1975: AII.f.2;
Engle 1979: type IV:3.
59. A moulded head of type B.4.A from the pool at Gibeon. It
is covered with white-wash and the remains of red paint
appear on the neck and around the eyes.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:421; Holland 1975: All.h.3;
Engle 1979: type IV:6.
60. A moulded head of type B from the pool at Gibeon. It is
covered with white-wash and the remains of red and yellow
paint. The neck is very long. The head is not exceptional,
only its photograph was taken from a peculiar angle.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 40:568; Holland 1975: AXll.r.1;
Engle 1979: type VII:15.
61. A body of type C.1 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered
with white-wash and the remains of red paint.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39: 432+435; Holland 1975:
AX.b.13.
62. A body of type C.1 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered
with white-wash and the remains of yellow paint.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39: 379; Holland 1975: AX.b.8.
63. A body of type C.1 from the pool at Gibeon. It has some
remains of white-wash and the 'stumps' of arms.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39: 437; Holland 1975: AX.a.3.
64. A body of type C.2 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered
with white-wash and bands of red and orange paint.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39:330; Holland 1975: A.X. b.1 O.
65. A body of type C.2 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered
with white-wash and bands of red paint.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39:511; Holland 1975: A.X.b.11.
66. A body of type C.2 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered
with white-wash and has a band of orange paint around the
neck.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39:419; Holland 1975: A.X.b.12.
67. A body of type C.2 from the pool at Gibeon. It is covered
with white-wash and the remains of red paint.
Context and date: cf. note to figurine no. 42 (above).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Gibeon WS: fig. 39:434; Holland 1975: AX.b.9.
68. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Kh. Hoga. Reg.
no. 79/1.
Context and date: surface find.
Literature: Gophna 1970:29, pI. 6:6; Holland 1975:115,
Al.a.16a (addenda).
69. A moulded head of type B.1-2 from Kh. Rabud, badly
preserved.
Context and date: locus 103, an open area between the city
wall and some houses (perhaps a court in one of these
houses). The locus was destroyed when the whole level
came to its violent end.
Literature: Kochavi 1974: 16, fig. 8:11; Engle 1979: type
VII:1.
70. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Jericho. It was
described as a male head with hair covering its ears and an
'archaic' smile.
Notes: according to the excavation report, two similar heads
were found in Jericho: one in a "Judean" house near the wall
in area L2, and the other in the "late Judean level" in the
north of the Tel. It is not clear which one appeares in the
photograph. For an identical head cf. App. 3: no. 70.
Literature: Sellin and Watzinger 1913:149, pI. 40:11:1;
Holland 1975:120, AIV.a.3; Engle 1979: type VII:20.
71. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Jericho. It has a
band, or turban, open at the back side and applied side-
locks. The excavators interpreted the figure as a "mother
goddess".
Context and date: phase LXIX of trench I, probably in a
domestic context (Jericho III: app. E, plan 232b).
Literature: Jericho IV:555, fig. ~23:6, reg. no. 3875.
[Fig. 5:4].
72. A moulded head of type B.3?E? from Jericho. It has
"double eyes", probably resulting from a mistaken second
imprint of the wet clay in the mould. This is the only type of
double imprint known so far among all the JPF. Interstingly,
the head was fired and probably used despite its exceptional
appearance.
Context and date: trench II, but without clear stratigraphy.
Notes: Holland defined it as having 5 rows of curls, but this
is probably the "doubling" of 3 rows in origin. The upper
imprint is the later, where the eyes are whole (it covers the
lower one).
Literature: Holland 1975:191f, A VI.e.1; Jericho IV:555, fig.
223:5; Engle 1979: type 1:13.
[Fig. 6:4].
73. A moulded head of type B.5.A-B? from Jericho (season
1931). Holland counted four rows of curls, but it seems that
there were five. The curls look wedge-shaped in the
photograph, but are actually a little rounded, almost square.
There are cuts on the neck and lower face, but it is not clear
wether these are ancient cuts.
Place: Rockefeller, PM.32.1796.
Note: according to the card of the museum, the head came
from tomb C1.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:121, 190, vol. 11:84, 145, pI.
41:9, type AV.c.1; Engle 1979: type VII:2.
74. A whole figurine of type Bc.4.A from Lachish. The head
was found broken (later mended).
Context and date: unknown.
Place: New York, Metropolitan Museum.
Notes: H. Colt, the financier of the Lachish excavations,
donated this figurine to the museum. It was not published in
the excavation reoprt (but cf. note to figurine no. 76 below).
Literature: Patai 1967: 65 photograph 1; Engle 1979: 1:5.
75. A whole figurine of type BC.2? from Lachish. The head is
badly preserved; the shoulder and part of the base are
broken and restored. Holland classified the side-lock as
simple, but perhaps it once had curls, which were worn out.
The museum's catalogue mentions two rows of curls above
the forehead.
Context and date: tomb 106 in square a6, a typical "Judean"
tomb with three rooms. About 25 skeletons were interned
there. The excavators dated it to between levels III and II, ca.
650-580 BC, but thought that the beginning can be earlier
than the end of level III. All the JPF were found in the
innermost room, but exact places were not registered. The
excavators dated these figurines to before 640 BC, but only
because they believed that their production ceased with
Josiah's reform (Lachish 1I1:180ff).
Place: New York, Jewish Museum JM.12-73.268a.
Notes: for more figurines from this tomb cf. figurines nos.
80, 82 below. In the museum catalogue, it is said that some
JPF were found in temples, but most are from houses and
tombs, therefore they are amulets or magical objects and not
"idols".
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 27:4; Holland 1975: AVlIl.a.1;
Engle 1979: type VII:26; Ackerman and Braunstein 1982: 63
no. 38.
76. A whole figurine of type BC.1.C from Lachish. The body
is rather narrow. The neck was broken and mended.
Context and date: tomb 1002, an irregular cave in the 100
cemetery area, square E.30. It was very disturbed, but
probably included secondary burials that suffered burning
(Lachish 111:228-235). More than 600 pottery vessels were
found there, in three phases (not really stratigraphic). All the
figurines came from the upper phase, and were found with
models of furniture, rattles, and other figurines (a horse and
rider,a bird and an animal). The excavators thought that the
burials were contamporraneous with level III.
Place: Rockefeller PM.33.2055, exhibition no. 372.
Notes: figurines nos. 77, 78, 81 were found in the same
tomb. Another female figurine was not published, but
mentioned as stored in the Colt collection (Lachish 111:235,
reg. no. 1254). This may be figurine no. 74 (above).
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 28:11; Holland 1975: AIV.a.5;
Engle 1979: 11:3.
77. Awhole figurine of type Be.3-4.F from Lachish. The body
is hollow and wheel-made. For this type cf. figurines nos. 78,
183 below.
Context and date: phases 6-10 in tomb 1002, cf. figurine no.
76 above.
Notes: Holland (1975:192) refered to AVlIl.b.1 by mistake;
read AVll.a.1 instead. Holland thought that these wheel-
made variations were very rare and were perhaps ordered
especially, and that figurines nos. 77-78 belonged to the
same person (but there is no proof for this).
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 28:13; Holland 1975:192, AVll.a.1;
Engle 1979: 111:8.
78. A whole figurine of type Be.2.G from Lachish. The body
is hollow and wheel-made. For this type cf. figurines nos. 77,
183.
Context and date: tomb 1002, cf. no. 76 above.
Place: Rockefeller PM.34.128, exhibition no. 370.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 28:10, reg. no. 1318; Holland
1975:192, AVll.b.1; Engle 1979: 111:11.
[Fig. 4:5].
79. A moulded head and part of a body of type B+.3.B from
Lachish. The right chick is scratched. The hands meet under
the breasts. According to Holland, the curls are wedge
shaped, as they seem in the photograph, but the photograph
is misleading since the curies are really square.
Context: tomb 120 in square A6 of cemetery 100, south west
of the city. Tufnell dated this tomb to the Late Bronze Age,
with a second phase after ca. 900 BC, and a third between
700-600 BC. The latest phase included 1500 bodies and
many animal bones, including bones of pigs. Sturcky
believed that this is a mass burial following the Assyrian
conquest, while Tufnell related the tomb to "heathen" that
were buried during Josiah's reforms. The pottery is close to
that of level III.
Place: Rockefeller PM.36.2245.
Literature: Lachish 1I1:193f, pI. 27:8, reg. no. 5187; Holland
1975: AV.b.1; Engle 1979: type VI:8.
80. A whole figurine of type Ac.1.Ap from Lachish. The head
is pointed.
Context and date: tomb 106, cf. figurines nos. 75, 82
(above).
Literature: Lachish 111:181, pI. 27:1; Holland 1975: Al.a.56.
81. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Lachish. The head
is pointed and has protrusions on its sides, probably
representing locks of hair.
Context and date: tomb 1002, cf. figurines nos. 76-78
(above).

182 183
Literature: Lachish 111:181, pI. 28:14; Holland 1975: Al.a.54.
82. A whole figurine of type Ac.1.Ap from Lachish. The head
is pointed.
Context and date: tomb 106, cf. figurines nos. 75, 80
(above).
Literature: Lachish 111:181, pI. 27:3; Holland 1975: Al.a.55.
83. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Lachish. It is badly
worn and has a long neck.
Context and date: locus 500, a general designation for an
area on the slope of the Tel, where domestic buildings from
level II-II were found, as well as remains from the Persian
period. The exact location is not clear.
Note: the eyes are not clear in the photograph, and I am not
sure how did Engle classify this head according to his eye
shapes.
Literature: Lachish 111:219, pI. 31:9, reg. no. 3890; Holland
1975: All.a.7; Engle 1979: type V:107.
84. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Lachish. It is badly
worn out.
Context and date: locus 500, cf. figurine no. 83 above.
Literature: Lachish 111:219, pI. 31:12, reg. no. 3885; Holland
1975: All.a.6; Engle 1979: type 111:12.
85. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Lachish. It is well
preserved, except damages to the chin and the nose.
Context and date: locus D/X, Le., surface find or debris
without clear stratigraphy.
Literature: Lachish 111:219, pI. 31:3; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.11;
Engle 1979: type 11:6.
86. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Lachish. It is quite
worn out, but still has remains of paint on its sides and back.
Context and date: square P17, in or near the "great shaft".
This shaft was perhaps build in level III, but the head could
have been carried from a nearby house of another level as
well.
Note: I see no reason why Engle classified this head as
"foreign" - other than the peculiar shape of the side-locks,
there is nothing exceptional. The Lachish report referred as
comparison to Gezer II: fig. 502, that is, to a clear JPF (it is
figurine no. 36 above).
Literature: Lachish 11I:158ff, pI. 31:8; Holland 1975: All.g.2;
Engle 1979: type VIII:8.
87. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Lachish. It is worn,
but has the remains of white-wash and red paint.
Context and date: locus H.17.1087, part of the road leading
from the gate to the palace, together with 3 Imlk stamps
(Lachish 111:124, plan 114).
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:4, reg. no. 7144; Holland 1975:
AlIl.d.13; Engle 1979: type 1:2.
88. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Lachish. It is worn
and broken at the chin.
Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:11; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.12;
Engle 1979: type 1:13.
89. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Lachish. It has the
remains of white-wash and red paint on the face, and red
band on the neck. The face is well preserved.
Context and date: locus 1078, a partially excavated room
north of the street leading from the gate to the palace. The
room is part of a large building (rooms 1079, 1085, 1088
etc.) of level III (Lachish 111:122, plan 114). The building may
have been public, but it was more likely domestic.
Place: Rockefeller PM.39.819.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:6, reg. no. 7094; Holland 1975:
AlIl.f.3; Engle 1979: type 1:33.
90. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Lachish, quite worn
out.
Context and date: locus 500 - cf. figurine no. 83 above.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:13, reg. no. 3891; Holland
1975: AIV.d.4; Engle 1979: type 111:7.
91. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Lachish. Part of its
peg is visible under the smearing of the clay upwards by the
potter, which obscured the sharp line of the chin.
Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:5, reg. no. 3069; Holland 1975:
AfV.d.5; Engle 1979: type V:108.
92. A moulded head of type B.3.D from Lachish. It is well
preserved.
Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above.
Note: Engle classified this head in his "curly" type, but the
eye details are very clear.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:1; Holland 1975: AV.b.2; Engle
1979: type VI:7.
93. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Lachish. It is little
worn out, with a pointed "hat" (not applied).
Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:7; Holland 1975: AIV.e.3; Engle
1979: type VIII:7.
94. A moulded head of type B.4.D from Lachish. It is well
preserved, with ful face, but the nose and the mouth are
damaged.
Context and date: locus D/X - cf. figurine no. 85 above.
Note: Holland suggested that it was formed in the same
mould as head no. 73 (above).
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:2; Holland 1975: AV.c.2; Engle
1979: type VI:1.
95. A hand-made head of type N1.A from Lachish.
Context and date: locus 500 - cf. figurine no. 83 above.
Place: Rockefeller PM.35.3068.
Notes: a reg. no. 3880 is written on the figurine. According to
the museum's card, it was found in 1934-5. It was first
published by Holland.
Literature: Holland 1975:144, A.l.a.56a, pI. 41:2.
96. A body fragment of type C.2 from Lachish. The hands
meet under the breasts.
Context and date: locus G.18.27, a large open area within
the city. It is very close to the surface and not well
preserved; thus the date and the context are not clear.
Literature: Lachish 11I:150ff, pI. 32:3, plan 124; Holland 1975:
AX.b.47.
97. A moulded head of type B.2 from Lachish. It is quite
worn, but has few remains of white-wash.
Context and date: locus 135 - a pit at the edge of the
excavated area, without clear relation to any building.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 78-2807.
Literature: Lachish V:16, pis. 12:1, 33:3, reg. no. 884/4;
Engle 1979: type IV:2.
98. A moulded head of type B.4 from Lachish. It is very
damaged and the shape of the curls is not clear.
Context and date: locus 94c, a whole square without any
building from level VI of the Late Bronze age (cf. Lachish V:
pis. 39-40).
Note: if the dating is correct, the head is much earlier than
any other JPF, and scholars already refered to this as very
unlikely, e.g., Engle 1979:20.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 78-2809.
Literature: Lachish V:16, pis. 12:3, 33:4, reg. no. 789/1;
Engle 1979: VII:22.
99. A moulded head of type B.2.B from Lachish. Part of it is
broken, but the remains are well preserved. It has two rows
of large square curls above the forehead, with the edge-of-
mould line above.
Context and date: locus 41, a large open area with poor
walls, ascribed to level IV.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 78-2808.
Literature: Lachish V:16, pis. 12:2, 33:2, reg. no. 373/2;
Engle 1979: type 11:4.
100. A pillar base of type C.3 from Lachish.
Context and date: locus 61a, an open area or a room from
level II in the south part of the excavations.
Literature: Lachish V: pI. 12:6.
101. A pillar base of type C.3 from Lachish.
Context and date: locus 24, an elongated room beneath the
"soliar temple". The room belonged to level II, and included
many vessels and rosette stamps.
Literature: Lachish V: pI. 12:5, reg. no. 177/1.
102. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Megiddo. It was
called "a mother goddess" in the report and compared with
the figurines from Judah. It was described as haVing bands
covering the ears. The preservation state is bad and the face
is blurred.
Context and date: surface find from an unexcavated area.
Note: Holland mentioned that this head is exceptional at
Megiddo, and the only one of his type AlII heads outside of
Judah.
Literature: May 1935:31, pI. 26:M.1776; Holland 1975:187,
typeAlIl.d.14; Engle 1979: type 1:35.
103. A moulded head of type B.SRT from Malhata. It is
exceptional: a narrow band appears above the forehand,
without any curled rows of hair. Long side-locks reach the
shoulders, with 7-8 square (?) curls in each.
Context and date: surface find found in 1981, ascribed to the
7th-6th centuries, when Malhata prospered.
Note: it is possible that this is not a JPF head, but a head of
a plaque figurine; cf. one from Tel Ira (Beck 1991). I could
not verify this by checking the head from Malhata personally.
Literature: Hubner 1989:50-52, pI. 7.
104. A body of type C.1 from Malhata (season 1967). The
breasts, the broken hands and the widened base are visible
in the photograph. Holland wrote that the figurine was
displayed in the Israel Museum, but gave an IAA number
(55-11).
Context and date: probably the trench area, B, from the end
of the Iron Age.
Literature: Holland 1975:131f, pI. 42:3, addenda, AX1.44a.
105. A moulded head of type B.O? from Azeka. The
existence of a peg is clear, but the head has a protruding wig
without curls. Holland defined it as his type AVlIl.a (cf.
figurine no. 75 above).
Context and date: the head was dated to the "late Judean"
level, 800-300 BC, but the context was not specified.
Note: Engle did not include this head within his "classic
pillar" types, but probably the difficulty in classification
results from the bad preservation state of this head.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902:136, pI. 68:4; Holland
1975:174, 193, AVlIl.a.3; Engle 1979: type VII:35.
106. A moulded head of type B.4.A-B from Azeka. The
drawing shows rounded face, surrounded by rows of little
curls, but the accuracy of the drawing is not clear.
Context and date: unknown.
Notes: this head and heads 108-109 (below) were only
published in a preliminary report (where they were called
"Egyptian"). They are missing from the final report of the
excavations. They are also missing from Holland's and
Engle's lists. Another head that was published in this
preliminary report (Bliss 1899: no. 4) is probably part of a
plaque figurine.
Literature: Bliss 1899:103, pI. 6:1.
107. A moulded head of type B.2?A from Azeka, with a
pointed top.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Bliss 1899:103, pI. 6:5.
108. A moulded head of type B.O? from Azeka. According to
the drawing it has no curls, other than square ones in the
side-locks.
Context and date: unknown.
Note: it is not certain that this head is really a JPF, and it
may have belonged to a plaque figurine or to some other
exceptional figurine.
Literature: Bliss 1899: 103, pI. 6:6.
109. A moulded head of type B.3.A? from Aroer. It is well
preserved, with a pointed top and parts of the peg still
visible. The hair is painted yellow, the forehead and face red,
and the eyes and the eyebrows black.
Context and date: silo 62, where whole vessels of the 7th
century BC were found. The silo is probably related to

184 185
domestic houses (Biran and Cohen 1981:259, 272, figs. 7-8
and plan fig. 4).
Literature: Biran and Cohen 1975:171, pI. 19c; Biran and
Cohen 1981: fig. 4:8, pI. 47:4; Engle 1979: type 1:7.
110. A moulded head of type B.3 from Aroer. Its mouth,
nose, left chick and neck are damaged, and the side-locks
are worn out. The shape of the curls is not clear anymore.
Context and date: locus 105, a court in a house outside the
city wall (Biran and Cohen 1981:263ff, fig. 11-12).
Literature: Biran and Cohen 1981: fig. 16:8, pI. 51:1.
111. A moulded head of type B.SRT? from Aroer. It is fairly
well preserved with traces of white-wash. The head is
rounded and has a 'band' on its forehead, without the usual
rows of curls.
Context and date: locus 339 in area D, probably from the 7th
century BC (Biran and Cohen 1981: fig. 10:1-7).
Note: the head appears flat in the cut and may have
belonged to a plaque-figurine, but this is less likely (cf. a
plaque figurine from Tel Ira, Beck 1991).
Literature: Biran and Cohen 1981:260, 263, fig. 10:8.
112. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Ramot (season
1992, reg. no. 912). It is fairly worn, but probably has three
rows of big, rounded curls above the forehead. The side-
locks carry 3-4 similar curls in double columns.
Context and date: locus 179, a residential quarter.
Place: IAA.
Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot.
113. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Ramot (season
1992, reg. no. 724). It is very badly preserved.
Context and date: locus 120, a pit of unclear nature in a
residential quarter.
Place: IAA.
Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot.
114. A body fragment of type C.2 from Ramot (season 1992,
reg. no. 136). The breasts and the right hand are all that
remains from the body.
Context: locus 775, a domestic area.
Place: IAA.
Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot.
115. A pillar base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992,
reg. no. 943). The base is concave.
Context: locus 196, a domestic area.
Place: IAA.
Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot.
116. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Ramat Rahel.
The photograph was made from a peculiar angle, and does
not clarify well the nature of the fragment.
Context and date: not published.
Note: Holland dated all the figurines from Ramat Rahel to
level Va, ca. 600 BC.
Literature: RR II: pI. 35:2; Holland 1975:153-155, type
Al.a.62.
186
117. A hand-made head of type A2 from Ramat Rahel. It
has a "turban" around the head. Basket no. 162/21.
Context and date: not published.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-1151.
Literature: RR I: pI. 24:2; Holland 1975: type Al.b.9.
118. A head and upper body of type A+.1.A from Ramat
Rahel. The figure holds a large disc vertically near to its
chest, the left hand supporting its bottom while the right
hand (now broken) probably beating it. The head is pointed,
and shows an effort of modeling facial features, but the
details are either worn out or not clear from the photograph.
Context and date: locus 286, a small casemate room in the
wall, where the "secret passage" was found. The figurine
was found on the stones at the inner edge of this passage
(RR 1:10f, plan 23), which continued to be used in level IV.
Literature: RR I: pI. 5; Holland 1975: vol. 1:154, 181f, type
Al.g.5.
[Fig. 4:4].
119. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Ramat Rahel. It is
mentioned as an Astarte in the report. A spiral line is incised
on the body. The head was broken and mended after
discovery.
Place: Romema, IAA 62-8, now in exhibition.
Notes: according to the Romema card, the basket no. is
1232/1, and the head was found in locus 329. This is a
storeroom in the citadel, probably public, Holland thought
that this figurine is very different than the usual JPF, but
other than being crude and having the incised line, it is quite
regular.
Literature: RR I: pI. 24:3-4; Holland 1975: vol. 1:183, type
Al.j.12.
120. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Ramat Rahel. It
has simple side-locks without curls. Its back side is
completely broken and the rest is very worn.
Context and date: not published.
Place: Romema 64-1376.
Note: according to the cards, the basket no. is 7321/1, but
the number written on the figurine is 5921/1.
Literature: RR II: pI. 35:1; Holland 1975: vol. 1:185, type
AII.f.3; Engle 1979: type IV:5.
121. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Ramat Rahel. It is
fairly well preserved, but the nose and the left chin are badly
damaged.
Context and date: not published, but possibly this head was
mentioned as a fine "curly head" found in storeroom 329,
where many of the JPF from season 1.960 have been found
(RR 1:41f).
Literature: RR I: pI. 24:1; Holland 1975: All.a.14; Engle
1979: type V:8.
122. A body of type C.1 from Ramat Rahel. The base is
missing, as well as the left hand. Reg no. 5982/1 (?).
Context and date: not published.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-1375.
Literature: RR II: pI. 36:1; Holland 1975: AX.b.71.
123. A body fragment of type C.2 from Ramat Rahel. The
hands support the breasts.
Context and date: not published.
Literature: RR II: pI. 36:2; Holland 1975: AX.b.70.
124. A whole figurine of type Be from Beth Shemesh. Only a
picture was published, but it is different than any other
figurine in the publications of Beth Shemesh.
Context and date: not published.
Place: Toronto.
Literature: Kelso 1962: pI. 23 right; Engle 1979: type IV:9.
125. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
The head is a little pointed, the neck and the body were
broken and mended after discovery.
Context and date: cistern 78 in square AK23 in the south of
the city, in an open area of cisterns and pits, but little
building remains. The pottery indicates a probable date of
the 7th century BC (TN 1:129, 293, pI. 46:1-7), but Zorn
dates this cistern to his levels 3-4, Le., all Iron Age II
(1993:1432).
Place: Rockefeller P.3464, exhibition no. 362.
Literature: TN 1:300, reg. no. M.146, pis. 46:6, 87:2; Holland
1975: Al.a.61.
126. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
The photograph is bad and small.
Context and date: locus 369 is part of house 368+366, near
the solid wall. It is not clear whether it is a court or a room,
public or domestic. The area saw few bUilding phases, and
369 may be later than the blocking of the nearby gate (TN
1:230f, fig. 60; TN 11:121).
Place: Berkeley box 2.
Notes: Holland gave the same reference also to figurine
Al.c.6. Zorn dated the room to the Persian period
(1993:1532).
Literature: TN I: reg. no. M.1608, pI. 86:14; Holland 1975:
Al.a.60.
127. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from
Tel en-Nasbeh. The pupils are incised. Only the shoulders
remained from the body.
Context and date: unknown.
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: TN I: 300, reg. no. M.577, pis. 86:15; Holland
1975: A.l.j.9.
128. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has a "turban". Holland mentioned side-locks, but I could not
see these. The preservation state is good, with the remains
of red paint on the turban.
Context and date: cistern 368, which had two openings into
domestic rooms 441 and 447. Pottery from the 7th century
BC, including an "Assyrian" bottle, was found there (TN
1:138, fig. 29b; TN 11:125).
Place: Rockefeller PM.35.3095.
Notes: the head is defined as "Persian" in the museum card,
and related to cistern 329a. Zorn dated cistern 368 to the
whole Iron Age II (1993:1448).
Literature: TN 1:300, reg. no. M.2480, pI. 53:18; Holland
1975: A.l.c.9.
187
129. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has a "collar" applied to the neck, perhaps a necklace (thus
Holland, cf. figurine no. 143 below). Only part of a shoulder
remained from the whole body.
Context and date: a general area of pits and domestic (?)
buildings in the west quarter, but exact locus unknown.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:10; Holland 1975: Al.a.58.
130. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context and date: room 586, a room or passage in a house
which includes rooms 590, 595 and cistern 356. The date is
mixed and uncertain (TN 11:2), but perhaps from early level I
(TN 1:184, fig. 43). Zorn could only give a broad limit oftime,
between 1000-425 BC (1993:1582).
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 86:11; Holland 1975: Al.a.59.
131. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has an applied ''turban''. The right side is damaged.
Context and date: locus 566, a room or a passage in a
domestic area. It was dated to "middle and late Iron Age, but
defined as mixed (TN 11:123). Zorn (1993:1587) noted two
rooms with this number, which he dated to "900-330" BC.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 86:5; Holland 1975: ALb.?
132. A pillar base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992).
Reg. no. 13748. The base is concave and has some remains
of white-wash.
Context: locus 1116 in area D, a domestic area.
Place: IAA.
Literature: unpublished, courtesy of A de-Groot.
133. A hand-made head of type A 3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has an applied "turban" and side-locks, but is broken and a
little blackened by fire. The nose is damaged and the right
side-lock is broken.
Context and date: cistern 216, in a large open area in the
north of the city (TN 1:229, n.1; TN II:124). From there came
also figurines no. 139, 153 and an exceptional head (TN I:
pI. 86:2 = Holland 1975: Al.b.8). Zorn dated this cistern to
the Iron Age and until the Roman period (1993:1439).
Place: Rockefeller PM.31.326.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:9, reg. no. M.866; Holland 1975:
Al.c.5.
134. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has an applied ''turban'' painted with orange. The face is
painted red and the neck has a kind of a 'collar', painted
orange (necklace?).
Context and date: locus 393, probably a domestic room in
the west quarter. It is probably later than the thin city wall,
but the excavators defined it as mixed (TN 11:121). Zorn
dated it to his level 3, of "900-330 BC" (1993:1538).
Note: figurine no. 152 is perhaps from the same house.
Place: Berkeley, box 5.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:2, reg. M.2338; Holland 1975:
Al.c.7.
135. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has an applied 'turban', painted orange; the face is red and
the hair and pupils are black. It has a 'collar', painted orange,
red and black in a geometric pattern (cf. figurine no. 134
above).
Context and date: locus 239, an open area with but a few
walls and the "bastion" of the early wall (TN 1:181, fig. 41; TN
11:121). It was dated to 600-500 BC; but cf. Zorn (1993:1503,
"1000-425 BC").
Place: Berkeley, box 5.
Literature: TN I: 300, pI. 86:1, reg. no. M.907; Holland 1975:
Al.c.8.
136. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
is broken, but has some remains of red paint.
Context and date: locus 221, an area south of the gate and
north of a large house, excavated during 1929 and 1932.
The excavators dated the material from this area to the 6th
century BC (late level I; cf. Zorn 1993:1499, "900-425 BC").
Place: Berkeley box 5.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:4; Holland 1975: Al.c.6, but cf.
note to figurine no. 126 above.
137. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has an applied 'turban' and hat. Side-locks are not seen in
the photograph.
Context and date: unknown, except a general area of
domestic houses and debris piles in the center of the town.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: 300, pI. 86:7; Holland 1975: Al.d.5.
138. A large hand-made head of type A3.A from Tel en-
Nasbeh. The applied ''turban'' is open at the back; the nose
is damaged. Reg. no. 1512.
Context and date: according to an inscription on the head, it
was found on 4.4.1932, in level II "east 224", north of 228.
224 is a living room in a large house south of the early gate
(with rooms 227+224).
Notes: according to Holland and the museum's card, the
head is from level I. It was first published by Holland. Zorn
(1993:1499, building 145.02) dated this room to his level 2,
from the "Babylonian-Roman" periods.
Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2057.
Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 41:3, addenda, Al.c.9a.
139. A hand-made head of type A4.Ap from Tel en-Nasbeh.
It has an applied hat. The eyes seem to be cut and not
pinched, and the left pupil is an incised.
Context and date: cistern 216, cf. no. 133 above.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: 300, pI. 86:3, M.998; Holland 1975: Al.j.8.
140. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
The photograph is not very clear and does not show that the
hat has a folded tassel. These is no representation of side-
locks.
Context and date: unknown, except general area of square
AB16 in the west city, an area of dense buildings.
Place: Rockefeller PM.35.3219.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:6, reg. no. M2814; Holland 1975:
Al.d.6.
188
[Fig. 5:6].
141. A moulded head of type A3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. In
the report it was compared to fig. 85:13 (= figurine no. 142
below). Holland probably used this fact for the classification,
since otherwise few details are clear.
Context and date: room 132, probably a domestic context of
small rooms in the north of the city (season 1929).
Place: Kansas city, no. 33-0313.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:25, reg. no. M.666; Holland 1975:
All.a.8; Engle 1979: type V:6.
142. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has some remains of white-wash.
Context and date: cistern 159, which opens into court 52 in a
house in the south-west part of the city. The cistern was
dated to the 8th-6th centuries BC, and the pottery
corroborates this dating (TN I:129, n.1, 276 no. 183, 281,
287: M.471, pI. 47, pI. 45:2; TN 11:124).
Note: figurines nos. 170, 179, 180 (below) were found in the
same cistern.
Place: Berkeley, in exhibition.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:13, pI. 47:10, reg. no. M.460;
Holland 1975: All.a.9; Engle 1979: type V:5.
143. A moulded head of type B? from Tel en-Nasbeh. The
photograph is bad and taken from a peculiar angle. Holland
classified this head as miscellaneous.
Context and date: it was fonund in front of cave 193 in the
eastern slope of the mound. The cave was used during
many periods, and there was an extra-mural domestic
quarter nearby during the Iron Age II period (TN 1:73, 217,
230, fig. 59; TN 11:124). Thus, the exact date and the nature
of context are unknown.
Place: Kansas city?
Note: from the same cave cf. figurine no. 167 below.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:26; Holland 1975: AXll.r.8;
Engle 1979: type VII:46.
144. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has a hole in the neck. Two rows of large square curls
appear above the forehead, with a 'band' beneath them.
Holland defined the hairdress otherwise, but the photograph
in the report is not good and might have mislead him. The
left side-lock is worn out.
Context and date: room or court 464, part of a domestic area
in the center of the city (season 1935). The room was
ascribed to level early I (TN 1:183f), but the area included a
few Iron Age phases not well separated. The dating of this
level to the 6th century BC was due to a late dating of the
Imlk stamps. Today, a date in the 8th-7th centuries BC is the
most probable (but cf. Zorn 1993:1556).
Place: Rockefeller, PM.35.3097.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:27, reg. no. M.2489; Holland
1975: All.a.11; Engle 1979: type VII:47.
145. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. In
the report it was compared to the head in pI. 85:13, and this
helped the classification (since the photograph does not
show clear details).
Context and date: unclear. The head was found in a huge
waste debris west of the early gate.
Place: Berkeley, box 5.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:14, reg. no. M.1545; Holland
1975: All.a.10; Engle 1979: type VII:16.
146. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. The
report mentions that it has three rows of curls and some
remains of red paint above white-wash.
Context and date: building level II from an open area near
the "bastion" in the north of the city.
Place: Berkeley, box 5.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:18, reg. no. M.1195; Holland
1975: All.a.13; Engle 1979: type VII:17.
147. A body of type C.1 from Samaria. The solid body can
be seen in the photograph, with the right arm broken and the
base damaged. It has a very thick neck.
Context and date: S.11.V (season 1910), a mixed debris
without clear stratigraphy. Reg. no. 4897.
Note: this is probably not a JPF body, but that of a figurine
with hair reaching the shoulders (cf. Samaria I: pI. 75g). I
have included it here just for reasons of doubt.
Literature: Samaria 1:334, pI. 75e; Holland 1975: All.b.72.
148. A moulded head of type B.2?A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has some remains of red paint on the face and black paint
on the eyes, and the peg is visible.
Context and date: locus 670, a room or a court in an area of
small houses and debris piles in the center of the city. Zorn
(1993:1601) dated the room later than the Iron Age.
Place: Berkeley, box 5.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:11, reg. no. M.2870; Holland
1975: All. c.11; Engle 1979: type V:103.
149. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
is well preserved, and probably has one row of curls.
Context and date: locus 161, a room or a court with poor
bulding walls in the north of the city (season 1929). One of
the walls of locus 161 is cut by pit 172. The room was dated
to 700-500 BC, but with very few and mixed finds (TN
11:120). Cf. Zorn 1993:1550.
Place: Berkeley, in exhibition.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:16, reg. no. M.690; Holland
1975: All.c.10; Engle 1979: type V:1.
150. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Three rows of curls are mentioned in the report. The
photograph shows a scratch or incision on the right chick,
and a 'band' between the curls and the face.
Context and date: room 438, an elongated space in an area
of congested small buildings, with some phases not well
defined during the excavation (cf. Zorn 1993:1550).
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:299f, pI. 85:9, reg. M.2245; Holland 1975:
A.ll.d.3; Engle 1979: V:101.
151. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
is broken, but the surviving part is fairly preserved. Holland
thought that it was made in the same mould as figurine no.
150 above.
189
Context and date: square AB/16, but exact provenience is
unknown (for the same area cf. figurine no. 140 above).
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:10, reg. no. M.2815; Holland
1975: All.d.2; Engle 1979: type V:102.
152. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
is very well preserved, with white-wash and a peg.
Context and date: 398, a little room in a poor bUilding area in
the west of the city. From the same building came figurine
no. 134 (above). For the date cf. TN 11:121; Zorn 1993:1540,
both not quite helpful.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:12, reg. no. M.2350; Holland
1975: All.d.4; Engle 1979: type VII:39.
153. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has the remains of white-wash, red paint on the face and
orange on the neck.
Context and date: cistern 216, cf. figurine no. 133 above.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:8, reg. no. M.994; Holland 1975:
AlIl.c.6; Engle 1979: type 1:24.
154. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has four (perhaps five?) rows of curls and some remains of
red paint.
Context and date: debris pile in square AF17, but dated to
level I.
Place: Berkeley, box 5.
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:7, reg. no. M.2419; Holland 1975:
AlIl.d.18; Engle 1979: type 1:22.
155. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has the remains of white-wash and four rows of curls.
Context and date: square AD19, domestic area in the center
of city (exact locus unknown).
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:4, reg. no. M.2759; Holland 1975:
Alll.d.17; Engle 1979: type 1:20.
156. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has some remains of white-wash and red paint.
Context and date: room 633 in the center of city, defined as
mixed (TN 11:123). The room is surrounded with other small
rooms, near a large building (rooms 643,641,638,637). Cf.
Zorn (1993:1593, level 3, all Iron Age II).
Note: the head may have been made in the same mould as
no. 157 below.
Place: once at Berkeley, currently unknown.
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:6, reg. no. M.2845; Holland 1975:
AlIl.d.19; Engle 1979: type 1:23.
157. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Only its face remained. Perhaps it was made ruthlessly, or
was not finished (thus TN 1:246). There are some remains of
blackening on the surface.
Context and date: square AF19, congested with buildings
from level I.
Note: this head may have been made from the same mould
as figurine no. 156 above.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:5, reg. no. M.2437; Holland 1975:
A.II I.d.20; Engle 1979: type 1:21.
158. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is
well preserved, with the remains of white-wash and red
paint.
Context and date: locus 642, a large room or court in a
house (rooms 650,645,651). Installations and waste debris
were found in this room, cf. Zorn 1993:1595.
Note: the published photograph is not good, and I have
followed Holland's classification.
Place: Berkeley, in exhibition.
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:19, reg. no. M.2851; Holland
1975: AIV.a.6; Engle 1979: type V:2.
159. A moulded head of type B.2.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has the remains of the peg and white-wash. A dot of red
paint remained on the left eye. Holland defined it as having
three rows of curls, but I saw only two.
Context and date: surface near pit 2 (season 1928). This pit
was not discussed in the TN reports, and I could not locate it
in the maps (nor in Zorn's thesis). According to the
Rockefeller card, the head is from pit 32 (also not discussed
in the TN report).
Place: Rockefeller, i.1708.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:20, reg. no. M.120; Holland 1975:
All.a.12; Engle 1979: type 111:13.
160. A moulded head of type B.2.C from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has the remains of white-wash and vertical curls.
Context and date: silo 92 in square AL23, dated to 650-550
BC by the excavators (one uninscribed stone weight was
found there as well: TN 1:276).
Place: Berkeley, box 2.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:15, reg. no. M.221; Holland 1975:
AIV.b.4; Engle 1979: type VII:19.
161. A moulded head of type B.2.C from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is
quite worn out, with probably two rows of curls (and not one)
and a peculiar pointed shape.
Context and date: debris pile 74, without clear dating; cf.
figurine no. 174 below.
Place: Rockefeller PM.31.327.
Notes: the head was defined as male in the museum's card.
Engle defined it as his 'foreign' type, but without any clear
reason.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:22, reg. no. M.1702; Holland
1975: AIV.e.5; Engle 1979: VIII:9.
162. A moulded head of type B.3-4.C from Tel en-Nasbeh.
The curls are quite worn out, either square or wedge shaped
(the photograph is misleading). The back side is very
flattened.
Context and date: square AC/17, an area of small houses
without clear dating.
Place: Rockefeller PM.35.3218.
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:23, reg. no. M.2808; Holland
1975: AIV.b.5; Engle 1979: VIII:18.
190
163. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
still has the peg, the remains of white-wash and red paint.
The "edge of the mould" line is seen above three rows of
large, square curls. Part of the right side is broken. The left
side-lock has two columns, with four curls in each column.
Context and date: room 435, part of a large complex (rooms
426, 434, 523, 515) in the western part of the town. The
exact nature of this building is not clear. Room 435 was
dated to level "early I", but with mixed material (TN I: figs.
42-43; TN 11:122; cf. Zorn 1993:1549).
Notes: the classification is different than that of Holland, who
may have relied on the photograph. Engle classified this
head as "doubtful", but it is a goodJPF type.
Place: Rockefeller PM.35.31 03.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:21, reg. no. M.2535; Holland
1975: AIV.e.7; Engle 1979: type VIII:24.
164. A moulded head of type B.2? from Tel en-Nasbeh. Its
upper and back sides are broken, and the curls are very
worn. The right side-lock has two columns of four large,
square curls.
Context and date: court 361 in a house, which includes room
359 (probably a casemate room of the earlier city wall).
Installations and pits were found in this court.
Note: Zorn (1993: 1530f) ascribed this head to locus 361a
and dated to the Iron II - Persian periods.
Place: Rockefeller PM.35.2516.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:24, reg. no. M.1550; Holland
1975: AIV.e.6; Engle 1979: type V:104.
. pottery see TN 1:227, TN 11:125; Wampler 1941:125ff; cf.
165. A moulded head of type B from Tel en-Nasbeh.
According to the report, it has a scarf, or hair, until the chin,
and a "veil holder" on the forehead. The photograph is not
good and the details are not clear (but cf. figurine no. 168
below). The nose is described as thick and flat, and the
remains of white-wash and orange paint are mentioned.
Context and date: room 273 in the city gate. Zorn
(1993:1511) further specified it as room 273a. The gate was
used for a long period of time, until the Persian period.
Place: Berkeley box 5.
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:3, reg. no. M.1698; Holland 1975:
AIX.a.2; Engle 1979: VIII:45.
166. A moulded head of type B.5.A from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is
blackened and has a high hairdress with five rows of curls,
the remains of red on the face and orange on the curls. It is
mentioned in the report as showing Egyptian influences.
Context and date: room 665, north of a large waste heap,
near rooms 669 and 664. It seems to be a domestic area,
but the plan is not very clear (cf. Zorn 1993:1600, house
125.05).
Note: Holland and Engle defined this head as exceptional
because of the hairdress, but all the other details are usual.
Place: Berkeley box 5.
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:2, reg. no. M.2868; Holland 1975:
AIX.d.1; Engle 1979: VIII:44.
167. A moulded head of type B.1.B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It is
very small and has a protrusion at the back, perhaps a "bun"
of hair. Some remains of red paint are visible on the face.
Context and date: near cave 193, in the slope outside the
city; cf. figurine no. 143 above. For the phases in this cave
cf. Zorn (1993: 1424f).
Note: the head is not exceptional, a fact noticed by Holland
as well.
Place: Berkeley box 5.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 85:17a-b, reg. no. M.816; Holland
1975: AIX.c.1; Engle 1979: V:7.
168. A moulded head of type B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It was
described as having a smooth hair, a band and a "veil
holder" above the eyes (cf. figurine no. 165 above). This
might be a representation of a jewel (thus Holland). A few
traces of white-wash and red paint appear on the face.
Context and date: cistern 176 in a two-roomed building near
the city wall. 139 baskets of finds were registered from this
cistern, including Imlk stamps, a cult stand and a coin
(probably intrusive). It was dated to 650-587 BC (TN 1:131,
233, pis. 49-50), but today one should widen the dating to
include the 8th century BC (cf. Zorn 1993:1437, "900-586
BC").
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:299, pI. 85:1, reg. no. M.1033; Holland
1975:1:193, AIX.a.1; Engle 1979: type VII:43.
169. A moulded head of type B from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has
the remains of white-wash and at least one row of curls.
Context and date: cistern 370, opening into room 439 in
square AF20. Its date is the 8th-7th centuries BC (for the
Zorn 1993:1448f).
Notes: Holland classified this head under his 'miscellaneous'
hairstyles. According to the museum's card, it was found in
pit 331 - but such a pit was not mentioned in the TN report,
and was perhaps a slip of hand.
Place: Rockefeller, PM.35.3104.
Literature: TN I: pis. 85:28, 53:32, reg. no. M.2544; Holland
1975: AXll.r.6; Engle 1979: VII:48.
170. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context and date: cistern 159, cf. figurine 142 above.
Place: Berkeley B7b.
Literature: TN I: pI. 47:11, reg. no. M.463; Holland 1975:
AX1.55.
171. A body of type C.1 from Tel en-Nasbeh. The base is
damaged.
Context and date: room 77, the massive square "tower" in
the center of the town. It was excavated in 1927, but was
very poor in finds. It may have been a Roman period
building (cf. Zorn 1993:1468), and the head may have come
from the surface.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:201f, pis. 86:17, 74:5, reg. no. M.416;
Holland 1975: AX.b.64.
172. A body of type C.1 from Tel en-Nasbeh. The base is
damaged.
Context and date: room 23, a narrow room or court in a
large building (rooms 20-26), above the early wall in the
south part of the town. It was possibly the house of a person
191
from the upper classes, dated by the excavators to the end
of the Iron Age, but perhaps from the Persian period (TN
1:120, 211f, fig. 52b). Zorn (1993:1457) dated this locus to
his level 2, Babylonian-Persian.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 86:16; Holland 1975: AX.b.67.
173. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context and date: square AH23, an open area in the south of
the town, with many pits and cisterns. The dating and the
exact locus are not clear.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 86:12, reg. no. M.175; Holland 1975:
AX.c.11.
174. A body fragment oftype C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context and date: waste heap 74, cf. figurine no. 161 above.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 86:21, reg. no. M.775; Holland 1975:
AX.b.68.
175. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has
a band of red paint on the neck.
Context and date: silo 145, in an open area of cisterns and
pits (near one stump of wall). The silo was dated by the
excavators to the 10th-8th centuries BC, but included very
few finds (cf. Zorn 1993:1619, "levels 2-4").
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:300, TN 11:124, pI. 86:20, reg. no. M.333;
Holland 1975: AX.c.10.
176. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. It
has the remains of white-wash and a geometric decoration in
orange on the neck. The fingers are marked by paint as well.
Context and date: square Z.24 north of the early gate
(season 1932), but the exact locus is not known.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:300, 313, pI. 86:19; Holland 1975: AX.b.65.
177. A body fragment oftype C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context and date: room 639 in the center of the city, near
room 633 (cf. figurine 156 above). According to Zorn
(1993:1549), the locus is 639a from his level 3.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:13; Holland 1975: AX.b.66.
178. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context and date: square AF26 near the city wall, an area of
silos, buildings and part of the early city wall.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:22, reg. no. M.870; Holland 1975:
AXa.10.
179. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh. The
hands are holding a large disk, but the photograph is not
good. Holland thought that it was a shield.
Context and date: cistern 159, cf. figurine no. 142 above.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 47:13, reg. no. MA64; Holland 1975:
ALgA.
180. A base oftype C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context and date: cistern 159, cf. figurine no. 142 above.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 47:12, reg. no. M.459; Holland 1975:
AX1.54.
181. A hand-made head and a body part of type A+.1.A from
Tel es-Safi. There are incisions on the neck and the remains
of breasts.
Context and date: not specified.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 138, fig. 51; Holland
1975: Al.a.63.
182. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel el-'Oreimeh
(Kinneret).
Context and date: locus 638, the central space of a public
storehouse in area 0 (Fritz 1990:56-58, plan 16, pis. 89-93).
The storehouse is dated to the 8th century BC.
Literature: Hubner in: Fritz 1990:119, fig. 102:2.
183. A moulded head and upper body part of type BC.3.B
from Tel el-'Oreimeh (Kinneret). It is described in detail in
the excavation report. The head is similar to the heads from
JUdah, with three rows of square curls. The side-locks have
two columns of four similar curls. The body is hollow and
wheel-made. The preservation state is very good.
Context and date: locus 555 from level II of the 8th century
BC (fritz 1990; Fritz 1993).
Place: Romema, IAA no. 85-448.
Literature: Hubner in: Fritz 1990:119, fig. 101:2, pI. 42a.
184. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Tel el-Areini (Tel
Erani). There are bands of paint on the body, perhaps
denoting a skirt.
Context and date: probably area A (reg. no. 60?). Other
details were not published.
Place: exhibited at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. IAA no.
60-725.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:96-98, 179, vol. II: 144,
addenda Al.a.6a; EAEHL New 11:420, bottom left.
185. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel el-Areini
(Erani).
Context and date: not published, but the Persian period is
mentioned.
Literature: Garbini 1964:134ft (general description only);
Moscati 1964:5-6; Patai 1967:66 photograph 2; Holland
1975: vol. 1:186, All.h.2; Engle 1979: type 111:5.
186. A moulded head of type B.2.B from Tel el-Areini (Tel
Erani).
Context and date: area A, level VI (Yeivin 1961:11-111), but
other details were not published.
Literature: Ciasca 1962: pI. ix:10; EAEHL:288 (Hebrew);
Holland 1975: vol. 1:186, AlIl.a.1; Engle 1979: type IV:6.
187. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Tel el-Areini (Tel
Erani).
Context and date: area A, levels IV-V.
192
Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: second row, third; Holland
1975: vol. 1:97, AIV.a.1; Engle 1979: type V:3; EAEHL New
11:420 bottom right.
188. A moulded head of type B.3-4.B from Tel el-Areini (Tel
Erani).
Context and date: area A, level VI.
Notes: According to Holland, the head was in the Israel
Museum, but he gave only an IAA no. (59-308). Holland
counted only three rows of curls above the forehead.
Literature: Moscati 1964: pI. 8; Patai 1967: 67, photographs
3-4; EAEHL:288; Holland 1975: vol. 1:187, vol. 11:145, pI.
41:8, AIII.f.1; Engle 1979: type IV:4; EAEHL New 11:420,
lower row left.
189. A moulded head of type B.?C from Tel el-Areini (Tel
Erani).
Context and date: area A, levels V-IV, 8th-7th centuries BC.
Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: third row, first; Holland 1975:
1:187, AIV.a.2; Engle 1979: type V:419; EAEHL New 11:420,
upper right.
190. A base of type C.3 from Tel el-Areini (Tel Erani).
Context and date: not published.
Literature: Ciasca 1962: pI. 20:2; Holland 1975: AX1.10.
191. A whole figurine of type AC.1.a from Tel el-Ful. The
head is rounded, the arms and the base are broken.
Context and date: burials on the southern slope of the Tel,
excavated in July 1909. Macalister dated the figurine to the
8th-7th centuries BC, but thought that it came from a
Cypriote origin.
Place: the figurines reached the collection of H.E. Clark, later
exhibited at the YMCA building, Jerusalem. Currently it is in
the Israel Museum (?).
Note: It seems that this figurine was 'forgotten', as it was not
mentioned in Pritchard's, Holland's or Engle's catalogues.
Literature: Macalister 1915:35-37, pI. 1:1; Sinclair 1960:51f.
192. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel el-Ful.
Context and date: surface find, but ascribed to level IIlb
(dated to the 6th century BC).
Literature: Lapp 1981: 113, pI. 32:4, 16.
193. A moulded head of type B.2.A from Tel el-Ful. It has
two rows of large rounded curls. The left part of the head is
missing.
Context and date: locus XVIII S-39, defined as a silo (it is
similar to the Gibeon "winery").' It was dated to level lila,
"640-587 BC" (Lapp 1981:43, figs. 22-23).
Literature: Lapp 1981: 113, 129, pI. 32:1, 13.
194. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel el-Ful. The
breasts and the right hand remained, with little traces of
white-wash.
Context and date: silo 38, a "pre-lIl.a" level assemblage; cf.
figurine no. 193 above.
Literature: Lapp 1981: 113, pI. 32:2, 4.
195. A moulded head of type B.2 from Shechem. It has
white-wash, exaggerated eyes, and probably two rows of
curls (now damaged). The side-locks are now worn out. Reg.
no. 1716.
Context and date: Sellin thought that it belonged to the
Hellenistic period, but it was found in an area where also an
Iron Age bUildingwas excavated. An exact locus is unknown.
Place: Rockefeller, i. 788.
Literature: Sellin 1927: 205ft, pI. 20i; Pritchard 1943:
Vllla:263; Holland 1975: All.c.12; Engle 1979: type VII:23.
196. A hand-made head of type A+.1.A from Tel Beit Mirsim.
It was defines as exceptional in the excavation report, but
without any explanation.
Context and date: locus SE.4.A2, a small room in a four-
roomed house near the casemate wall, between the city wall
and the street.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM 111:69, s.n.1239, pis. 31:7, 54b:9; Albright
1939:120, pI. C:7; Holland 1975: Al.a.57.
197. A whole figurine of type BC.1.B from Tel Beit Mirsim.
The neck is tall and very thick (it was broken, but mended
after discovery). I follow Holland's classification, but the
details of the curls are not evident from the published
material.
Context and date: pit SE.13.A2 in square 13, but exact place
inside the square was not specified (perhaps pit 32, where
figurines nos. 203, 229 were found; but there are other pits
in the same square).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM 111:69, s.n.1803, pis. 29:12, 56:3; Holland
1975: AliI. e.1; Engle 1979: type IV:1.
198. A whole figurine of type BC.2.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. It
has a tall, thick neck. The base is damaged and the left hand
is missing.
Context and date: a pit in square SE.13.A, cf. figurine no.
197 above.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM 111:69, s.n.1468, pis. 31:6; Holland 1975:
All.c.9; Engle 1979: type VII:14.
199. A moulded head and upper body of type B+.2.A from
Tel Beit Mirsim. The body is broken below the chest. There
are two rows of large curls above the forehead. The side-
locks are either simple or worn out.
Context and date: locus SE.22.A6, a small room or an open
area (its surroundings were only partially excavated).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM II: pI. 25:9; TBM 111:176, s.n.523, pI. 57c:2;
Albright 1939:pl. B:9; Pritchard 1943: VII:204; Holland 1975:
All.e.6; Engle 1979: type IV:3.
200. A nearly whole figurine of type Bc.3-4.A from Tel Beit
Mirsim. The base is missing. The neck is very thick.
Context and date: locus SE.21.A1, a room south of street 7
(TBM III: plan 4).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. B:10; TBM II: pI. 25:10; TBM
111:69, s.n.523, pI. 57c:3; Pritchard 1943: VII:208, fig. 21;
Holland 1975: All.h.5; Engle 1979: type VII:28.
193
201. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel Beit Mirsim.
The peg is still left.
Context and date: debris in the SW quarter.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: s.n.881, pis. 31:1; 54:6; Albright 1939: pI.
C:1; Holland 1975: AlIl.c.5; Engle 1979: type 1:27.
202. A moulded head of type B.4.A from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: square SE.23A (season 1930).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: s.n.1228, pis. 31:4; 54b:3; Albright
1939:pl. C:4; Holland 1975: All.b.1; Engle 1979: type VIA.
203. A moulded head oftype B.2.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. It is
badly preserved.
Context and date: silo 32 in square SE.13 (season 1930).
The silo was dug into room 19, a room in bUilding 10+18
north of the main street (TBM 111:52, pI.3).
Note: Albright thought that it is the earliest pillar-figurine,
from the 8th century BC or earlier. Figurine no. 229 (below)
was found in the same silo.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:11; TBM III: pis. 31:11; 54b:5;
Holland 1975: All.c.7; Engle 1979: type VII:11.
204. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. It
is fairly preserved.
Context and date: debris of level A in square SE.22 (season
1932).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pl. 56:1, s.n.1808; Holland 1975:
All.c.8; Engle 1979: type V:204.
205. A moulded head of type B.3-5.A from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus NW.32.10, an open area with little
bUilding remains and a cistern. There were also remains of
an olive press, but not in situ (TBM 111:60).
Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2730.
Notes: I could not find this head in the museum, and the
details of the curls are not clear from the photograph in the
report.
Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:2, s.n.2105; Holland 1975: A.ll.h.6;
Engle 1979: type 1:10.
206. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus SE.4.A3, probably a court of a four-
roomed house between the city wall and the street.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:12; TBM III: pI. 31:12, pI.
54b:8, s.n.1019; Holland 1975: Alll.d.15; Engle 1979: type
VII:12.
207. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus SE.22.A5, a long room or court in a
large building (rooms 3+4+9) north of the street.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:15; TBM III: pI. 31:15, pI.
54b:4, s.n.908; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.16; Engle 1979: type
VI:3.

208. A moulded head of type B.2.C from Tel Beit Mirsim. It
is flattened and its nose is broken. It has two rows of large,
vertical curls above the forehead.
Context and date: locus SE.14.A3, an narrow room in a
house situated between the city wall and the street (with
casemate rooms 9-10). Possibly, room 3 could have been a
storage area.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Note: the head is very similar to head no. 212 below.
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:14; TBM III: pI. 31:14, pI.
54b:2, s.n.1332; Holland 1975: AIV.b.3; Engle 1979: type
111:10.
209. A moulded head of type B.2.C from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus SE.51.5N, a court or a room of a
thick-walled building (rooms 5w, 5e, 5n, 6; TBM III: pI. 5).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. B:8; TBM II: pI. 25:8; TBM III:
pI. 57c:1, s.n.193; Holland 1975: AIV.b.2; Engle 1979: type
VII:21.
[Fig. 6:6].
210. A moulded head of type B.2.A from Tel Beit Mirsim. It is
covered with white-wash and red paint on the face. Two rows
of large, rounded curls appear above the forehead, with an
edge-of-mould line clear above them. The left side-lock has
two curls, of which the lower is elongated (perhaps an
indication of an earring?).
Context and date: locus NW.32.10, a cistern in a court of a
four-roomed house. No. 10 appears for the court and the
room near it as well, but the cistern was surely related to the
court (cf. TBM 1I1:50f, 63).
Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2778.
Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:5, s.n.2450; Holland 1975:
AIV.c.1; Engle 1979: type V:102.
211. A moulded head of type B.2.G from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus NW.22.5, an open court with
installations in a four-roomed house.
Place: Rockefeller i-8928.
Note: I followed Holland's classification, but the details of the
curls are not very clear.
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:3; TBM III: pI. 31:3, s.n.1383;
Holland 1975: AVll.b.3; Engle 1979: type VII:13.
212. A moulded head of type B.2.G from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus SE.12.A5, a room in a building (loci
1+2+3+5) north of the street.
Note: I could not locate the head in the Rockefeller museum.
It is similar to no. 208, and may have been done in the same
mould. The curls are slightly different - but the drawings may
not be precise.
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:13; TBM III: pis. 31:13, 54:1,
s.n.909; Holland 1975: AVll.b.2; Engle 1979: type 111:9.
213. A moulded head of type B from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus SE.14.A6, a room in a house
between the city wall and the street (rooms 5, 6, 7, 16a and
casemates 4, 12).
Place: Pittsburgh?
194
Note: Holland classified the head as having a simple hair
without curls, but it is badly preserved and the curls may
have been worn out.
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C.2; TBM III: pis. -31:2, 54:7,
s.n.986; Holland 1975: AVlIl.a.2; Engle 1979: type VII:10.
214. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The hands are
broken and the base is damaged.
Context and date: locus SE.31.A9, a room made of poor
walls.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. B.11; TBM II: pI. 25:11; TBM
III: pI. 57c:5, s.n.543; Pritchard 1943: type VII:214, fig. 20;
Holland 1975: AX.b.51.
215. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The right arm
is missing, but the hand is still glued to the body. There are
some remains of white-wash and a depression for the peg of
the head.
Context and date: locus NW.31.8, an open court in a
building (room 7 and casemate 9) near the city wall (TBM
11I:50f).
Place: Rockefeller, PM.32.2769.
Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:6, s.n.2406; Holland 1975:
AX.b.59.
216. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The body was
broken and mended after discovery.
Context and date: locus SE.32.10, an open court with
installations in an area of congested buildings (TBM 11I:50f).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:10, s.n.2295; Holland 1975:
AX.b.55.
217. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The right
breast and the base are little damaged.
Context and date: pit in locus SE.13.A2, the same pit where
figurines no. 197, 218 have been found.
Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2697.
Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:11, s.n.1805; Holland 1975:
AX.b.56.
218. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The left arm is
missing. The neck is very thick.
Context and date: pit in locus SE.13.A2, the same pit where
figurines nos. 197,217 have been found.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:8, s.n.1804; Holland 1975:
AX.b.57.
219. A moulded head of type B from Tel Beit Mirsim. It is
very crudely made and badly preserved. There are no curls,
but the upper part is broken. It has protruding side-locks and
the remains of the peg of the head.
Context and date: locus NW.31.11, a casemate room in a
four-roomed bUilding (TBM 1I1:50f).
Place: Rockefeller PM.32.2762.
Notes: Holland defined this head as miscellaneous, because
of the lack of curls. Engle classified it as his type V, but the
shape of the eyes is not clear at all.
Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:4, s.n.2313; Holland 1975:
AXll.r.5; Engle 1979: type V:205.
220. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus NW.32.12, an area explained as an
olive press (TBM 11I:62f). It is a large, probably open area,
with remains of small walls and two installations. The exact
provenienceof the head is not clear.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:9, s.n.2548; Holland 1975:
AX.b.60.
221. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context: locus NW.32.12, cf. figurine no. 220 above.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pI. 55:7, s.n.2396; Holland 1975:
AX.b.58.
222. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The
depression for the peg of the head is clearly visible at the
upper edge of the body.
Context and date: locus NW.21.15, a room in a building
surrounded by small alleys (13+14; TBM III: pI.6).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:8; TBM III: pis. 31:8, 54b:10
s.n.1119; Holland 1975: AX.b.63.
223. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: square SE.12.A, without specific locus
number.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:10; TBM III: pis. 31:10,
54b:11 s.n.988; Holland 1975: AX.b.53.
224. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The hands and
the breasts survived.
Context and date: "immediately north-west of the eastern
gate", an area of an open piazza on the inner side of the
gate. Only two small investigation probes were made in this
area (TBM 11I:47f, pI. 5).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. B:12; TBM II: pI. 25:12; TBM
111:162, pI. 57c:6, s.n.29; Pritchard 1943: type VII:213;
Holland 1975: A.X.b.50.
225. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The breasts
and the left hand remained.
Context and date: the "western tower", a large public (?)
building dated by Albright to the 9th-6th centuries BC (TBM
111:41-47). The specific locus and phase inside the building
were not given in the report.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM 111:201, pI. 56:8, s.n.2360; Holland 1975:
AX.b.54.
226. A body oftype C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus NW.21.2, part of a street between
houses, near an entrance to one house (TBM 111:50, fig. 3, pI.
6).
Place: Pittsburgh?
195
Literature: Albright 1939: pI. C:5; TBM III: pI. 31:5, s.n.1544;
Holland 1975: AX1.48.
227. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. Part of the
chest and the right hand survived.
Context: square SE.33, out of context.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:6, s.n.2296; Holland 1975:
AX.b.62.
228. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The
depression of the peg is visible at the upper end of the body.
Context: locus SE.51.8E.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM II: pI. 25:13; TBM III: pI. 57c:7, s.n.84;
Pritchard 1943: type VII:212; Holland 1975: AX.b.49.
229. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. Only the chest
remained.
Context and date: silo 32, see figurine no. 203 above.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pis. 31:9, 54b:12, s.n.1329; Holland
1975: AX.b.52.
230. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beit Mirsim. The
photograph does not show the details clearly, but two
protrusions at the sides of the "pillar" are evident, with
impressed motives (wedge shaped?) above them.
Context and date: locus NW.31.6, an open court (see TBM
1I1:50f) in a house (rooms 5+6+7) near the city wall.
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:7, s.n.2004; Holland 1975:
AX.b.61.
231. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Context and date: locus NW.22.13, a room (and not a court)
in a four-roomed house (loci 4+5+12+13).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pI. 56:9, s.n.1817; Holland 1975: AX1.47.
232. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Tel Beit Mirsim.
The "pillar" body and the hand-made head are usual, but the
figurine is exceptional since a small hand-made child is
applied to its back. The left hand of the woman supports the
child, whose head is missing and whose hands clutch the
woman's neck.
Context and date: cistern E.33.A15 (season 1928), near a
'dyeing' installation in an open area. Albright thought that the
cistern is later than the installation. The cistern was rich in
finds, and was dated to level A (TBM 111:57, 63f).
Place: Pittsburgh?
Literature: TBM III: pis. 32:1, 54b:4, s.n.670; Holland 1975:
Al.h.2.
233. A moulded head of type B.4?B from Tel ej-Judeideh
(Tel Goded). The peg is clear. The head has four rows of
curls (following Holland; the drawing shows only three rows).
Context and date: cf. figurine no. 234 below.
Place: Rockefeller PM.63, currently exhibited at Nir-David.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902:136, pI. 68:7; Holland
1975: AlIl.d.10; Engle 1979: type 1:30.

234. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel ej-Judeideh (Tel
Goded). It has a high, pointed "hat", three rows of large,
square curls and probably an edge-of-mould line above
them. The side-locks have two columns of four square curls.
Some traces of red paint appear above the white-wash. The
face is beautiful, but the chin, the nose and the right chick
are a little damaged.
Context and date: the so called "Late Judean" level, where
"private" seals of the 8th century BC have been found. The
exact locus was not specified.
Place: Rockefeller P.1094.
Note: Holland should have classified this head as his type
AlIl.cand notAlll.f.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 136, pI. 68:8; Holland
1975: AIII.f.2; Engle 1979: type VII:7; Gibson 1994:136, fig.
20:11.
235. A moulded head of type B.1.C from Tel ej-Judeideh (Tel
Goded). It is flattened and has one row of large, vertical
curls, with a second, higher ridge (but without curls). The
side-locks are simple.
Context and date: cf. figurine no. 234 above.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902:136, pI. 68:6; Holland
1975: AIV.a.4; Engle 1979: type VII:3.
236. A moulded head and upper body of type B.4.A? from
Tel ej-Judeideh (Tel Goded). It has a high "hat" with
horizontal bands of red paint. The face is covered with white-
wash and red paint. There are four rows of little (rounded?)
curls above the forehead. The left side-lock survived, with
probably 2-3 curls.
Context and date: cf. figurine 234 above.
Place: Rockefeller P.55.
Notes: Holland and Engle classified this head as
miscellaneous, but it is not exceptional in any way from the
other JPF; cf. also app. 3: no. 86.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 136, pI. 68: 10;
Pritchard 1943: type VII:205; Holland 1975: AXll.b.1; Engle
1979: type VII:8.
237. A body of type C.1 from Tel ej-Judeideh (Tel Goded).
According to the excavators, it is hollow, but perhaps they
meant only a hollow (concave) base. A decoration of black
lines appears on the neck.
Context and date: cf. figurine no. 234 above.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902:136, pl. 68:9; Pritchard
1943: type VII:206; Holland 1975: AX.bA6.
238. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel Halif (Lahav). It
has three rows of large, square (?) curls. The side-locks
have a few columns of similar curls.
Context and date: on floor G.8005, in a room of level Vlb
from the end of the 8th century BC. Near the head were
found a fenestrated incense-stand and two blocks of worked
limestone (standing stones?). The excavators defined the
room as a "house shrine".
Place: with the excavation team.
Literature: Had. Arch. 100-101 (1994):109 (Hebrew); Seger
1992 (without page nos.); Seger 1992b:66; Borowski
1995:151, 152: photograph.
196
239. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel Halif (Lahav).
Context and date: area A
Place: with the excavation team, under study.
Literature: unpublished, courtesy of O. Borowski.
240. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Tel Masos. It is
pointed and shows the remains of the peg.
Context and date: Locus 602 in area G, but the stratigraphy
was not mentioned. Locus 602 appears as the chapel of the
Nestorian monastery in area D, square G.13 (Masos 1:141-
143, 248, plan 26). The level where the head was found fits
that of the floor of the chapel. Probably the head belonged to
the Iron age level, which was found beneath the monastery
(ibid:123).
Literature: Masos 1:131, pI. 110:4, reg. no. 983/3.
241. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Tel Masos. It has
a very long neck and an applied hat.
Context and date: Locus 778, a street from building phase 3
of the 7th century BC.
Literature: Masos I:131, pI. 110:2, reg. no. 3646/1.
242. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from Tel Masos. The
photograph indicates its bad preservation state, but probably
it had 3-4 rows above the forehead (there is no evidence for
curls, which may have been worn out).
Context and date: Locus 741, under street 768 from phase 3
(area G; Masos I:125ff, plan 23). Thus, the head is earlier
than level 3 (but even level 4 belongs to the 8th century BC).
The nature of the locus cannot be determined.
Literature: Masos 1:131, pI. 110:3, reg. no. 1547/1.
243. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel Masos. The
breasts, the hands and the neck remained.
Context and date: Locus 612, the entrance room to the
Nestorian monastery; but the levels indicate that the head
was found much lower, in the Iron Age level beneath (Masos
1:123, 141,248, plan 26).
Literature: Masos I:131, pI. 110:6a+b, reg. no. 1094/1.
244. A base of type C.3 from Tel Masos.
Context and date: Locus 708, a room from phase 2 (area G)
of the 7th century BC. The nature of the room is not clear.
Literature: Masos 1:130, pI. 111:5, reg. no. 1460/1.
245. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Tel 'Ira. It is made
of orange-red clay, with little traces of white-wash. The face
is full and beautiful, but the nose, mouth and lower side-
locks are damaged and the back side is broken. There are
three rows of square curls above the forehead, and an edge-
of-mould line above them. The side-locks exhibit two
columns of five or more similar curls.
Context and date: Locus 574, a public storehouse near the
city gate. Reg. no. 4539/1.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 1, pI. 13:2.
[Fig. 6:2].
246. A moulded head of type BA.D? from Tel 'Ira. It is not
well preserved and the facial details are quite worn. The
surface is blackened. There are four rows of wedge shaped
(?) curls and an edge-of-mould line above them. The right
side-lock is worn, but probably the left one has four curls.
Context and date: Locus 159, in the glacis outside the city
wall near the gate. An exact date cannot be established.
Reg. no. 776/1.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 2, pI. 13:6.
247. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from Tel 'Ira. The face is
elongated, but partly damaged. Evidence of white-wash
remained, but part of the surface is blackened. The section
of the neck shows clearly the peg. There are four rows above
the forehead, three of these probably had curls in origin.
The side-locks are either simple or worn out.
Context and date: Locus 191, a room at the back of a public
bUilding near the gate. Reg. no. 4021/1.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 4, pI. 13:3.
248. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A from Tel 'Ira. It is a bit
flattened and has some remains of white-wash and a red
band on the forehead. The left chick is scratched and the
nose is somewhat damaged. The number of rows of curls is
not clear. The side-locks have two columns of five rounded
curls. The eyes are large and elongated.
Context and date: Locus 152, in the glacis area outside the
city wall (cf. no. 264 above). Reg. no. 773/1.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 5, pI. 13:5.
249. A moulded head of type B.3-4.A? from Tel 'Ira. It is very
worn, broken on the right side and has a few remains of
white-wash. There are probably four ridges, with three rows
of small curls above the forehead. There are at least four
curls in one column on the left side-lock.
Context and date: Locus 591, a large open area near the
public storehouse. Reg. no. 4623/1.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 3, pI. 13:4.
250. A body fragment of type C from Tel 'Ira. It is damaged
and has a few remains of white-wash. It is probably the
lower back part with the beginning of the base.
Context and date: Locus 526, a casemate room in the city
wall, not connected with a house. Reg. no. 4548/1.
Place: Tel Aviv. Literature: Kletter in Press B: no. 6.
251. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.Ah
from Tel Beer Sheba. The hands are missing. The head is
flattened from above and "hammer" shaped (with
protrusions, perhaps indications of ears). Signs of breakage
on the chest indicate breasts or perhaps an object held in the
hands (a disk?).
Context and date: Locus 1007 (former 1340), the central
space in a public storehouse in square R.19. it is dated to
level II of the 8th century BC. Reg. no. 14125/1.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: unpublished, courtesy of the excavation team.
197
252. A whole figurine of type AC.1.Ah from Tel Beer Sheba.
The head is "hammer" like. The neck and the head are
decorated with white, red and blue bands.
Context and date: Locus 25, on the floor of a room of a
domestic house in the western quarter. Near the figurine
were found models of a miniature bed and a lamp, as well as
daily pottery vessels. Level II, 8th century BC. Reg. no.
1086/1.
Place: Exhibited in the Israel Museum, 1M no. 78-1437.
Literature: Jerusalem Post 16.9.1969; Aharoni 1971:
photograph (without page numbers.); Aharoni 1973:22,
photograph 6; BS 1:36, pI. 71:1, photograph pI. 27:2; Holland
1975: Al.a.2.
[Fig. 5:2].
253. A whole figurine of type BC.2.A-B? from Tel Beer
Sheba. The head is a little pointed, but not well preserved.
The facial features are worn out, one breast is damaged
(now restored) and the base is broken and mended. The
photograph shows two rows of large, square or rounded
curls above the forehead. The hands do not meet under the
breasts.
Context and date: locus 300 (formerly 256), the western
room of a public storehouse near the gate. Level II, 8th
century BC. Reg. no. 1192/1.
Place: not clear.
Note: this figurine is missing from the work of Holland and
Engle, and was not published in the BS I report.
Literature: Aharoni 1973:22, photograph 5.
254. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel Beer Sheba.
It is rounded and covered with white-wash and some
remains of yellow-brown paint on the neck.
Context and date: Locus 1004, a room of a public
storehouse in square P.1. Reg. no. 14218/1 or 14148/1.
Note: figurine no. 266 was found in the same locus.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
[Fig. 5:1].
255. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel Beer Sheba.
It is rounded and exceptional, in that there are no clear eye-
depressions. Reg. no. 5103/1.
Context and date: Locus 270, the central space of the public
storehouse in square P.1. Level II, 8th century BC.
Note: for a very similar head cf. figurine no. 256.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
256. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel Beer Sheba.
It is similar to no. 255 above, but rather worn out. Reg. no.
7760/1.
Context and date: Locus 827.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
257. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Tel Beer Sheba.
It is a little pointed, but the edge is broken. The eye
depressions still retain some white-wash (season 1969).
Context and date: Locus 29 (unified with 38), the big
circumference street. The head was found in the gray fill of
this street. It probably came from square U2 (and not T1, as
appears in one of the excavation diaries). Reg. no. 1462/2.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
258. A moulded head of type B.6.C from Tel Beer Sheba.
There are remains of White-wash, yellow paint on the neck
and red on the face. The face is full and well preserved. The
eyes are crude and a-symmetric. There are six rows of little
wedge-like curls above the forehead. The side-locks have 3-
4 columns, each with four or more similar curls. Reg. no.
1420/1.
Context: Locus 93, a small frontal room of a four-roomed
house in the western quarter. The nature of the room is not
clear (stair-room or storage area?).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
[Fig. 6:5].
259. A moulded head of type B.4.E? from Tel Beer Sheba
(season 1972). The face is full but very worn out. There are
four ridges above the forehead, probably without any curls.
The side-lock are simple or worn out. Reg. no. 10752/1.
Context: Locus 1253 in square 01, a space in the eastern
annex of the "cellars house" (32). The nature of this complex
is not clear, nor if it is really part of the "cellars house".
Note: a fragment of a bed model, reg. no. 1758, was found
in the same area.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
260. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Tel Beer Sheba. It
is not well preserved. Three rows of large, rounded curls are
still clear above the forehead. Reg. no. 3281/1?
Context: Locus 462, an open area north of the large house
(416) in the south of the city. This house was explained as a
residency of a governor, because of its size and ashlar
masonry (BS 1:14, 135, plan 84).
Place: Romema, IAA.1993-15.
Note: on the figurine a different number appears: 3281/1. It
is possible that this figurine was switched with figurine no.
263 (below) in the BS report (photographs 5 and 8 in the
plate of the report).
Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:5; Engle 1979: type VI:5.
261. A moulded head of type B.?A from Tel Beer Sheba. All
the upper part is broken, thus the shape of the curls is
unknown. The right side-lock has two columns of rounded
(?) curls. The face is rounded, with some traces of white-
wash, yellow-brown paint on the neck and red paint on the
side-locks and lower head. The section of neck shows the
peg of the head.
Context and date: Locus 832, a room in a house in the
western part of the city, between the city wall and the street.
Level II, 8th century BC.
Note: in the report the reg. no. is 7789/1, but on the head
another number is written, 7289/1.
Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:7; Engle 1979: type 111:15.
198
262. A moulded head of type B.2?A? from Tel Beer Sheba
(season 1970). It is a little flattened at the top. The face is
full. The nose, hair and chicks are damaged. There are two
ridges above the forehead, with large, probably rounded
curls. The section of the neck shows the peg. Reg. no.
3449/1.
Context and date: Locus 443, a destruction layer on a floor
of a building near the gate. The nature of this building is not
clear (the pottery was only partially published). Level II, 8th
century BC.
Note: figurine no. 268 (below) was found in the same locus.
Place: Romema, IAA.199~-16.
Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:6; Engle 1979: 11:5.
263. A moulded head of type B.4?A-B from Tel Beer Sheba.
It is fairly preserved, with full face and four rows of little curls
(square or round).
Context and date: Locus 521, a narrow passage between the
water system and house 529 in the northern part of the city.
Level III, 8th century BC.
Note: the reg. no. is probably 4739/1 (cf. note to figurine no.
260 above).
Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:8; Aharoni 1971:
photograph (without page numbers); Engle 1979: type 1:4.
264. A moulded head of type B.3? from Tel Beer Sheba. The
face is rounded and worn. There are probably three ridges of
large curls above the forehead, but they are very worn out.
The side-locks have columns of 4-5 curls, also worn.
Context and date: Locus 766, a court or a room in a
domestic bUilding in the north part of the city. Level II, 8th
century BC.
Reg. no. 7419/1.
Place: Romema, IAA.1993-13.
Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:9.
265. A fragmented moulded head of type B.4.C? from Tel
Beer Sheba. All the left side is broken away. The section of
the neck shows the peg. I classified the curls as wedge
shaped, but they are very worn out. Reg. no. 15462/1.
Context and date: Locus 1782, later unified with 1200, the
great street leading from the gate towards house 32. Level II,
8th century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
266. A fragmented moulded head of type B.2? from Tel Beer
Sheba (season 1973). It is badly preserved, pointed and has
two rows of rounded, very worn oat curls. Reg. no. 14105/1.
Context and date: Locus 1603, square R.19. This was
unified with 1004, the eastern space of a public storehouse.
The figurine was found high above the floor level. Level II,
8th century BC.
Note: figurine no. 254 was found in the same locus.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
267. A moulded head of type B from Tel Beer Sheba. It is
badly preserved and fragmented. The neck is painted yellow
and red, and the face is painted red.
Context and date: Locus 553, a whole square (S.2) in the
east part of the city. The locus extends from surface to about
2 m deep, without bUilding remains. It was dated to the
Hellenistic level.
Place: Romema, IAA. 1993-14.
Literature: BS I: photograph pI. 27:4; Engle 1979: type
111:14.
268. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1972).
The left breast and the arms are broken, but part of the right
hand is still in place on the body. A few traces of white-wash
survived. Reg. no. 9398/1.
Context and date: Locus 443, cf. figurine no. 262 above.
Note: according to the area diary, the body was found in a
pit full of waste and ashes.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
269. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1974).
The base is damaged and the arms are broken. The
depression for the peg of the head is clear at the upper edge
of the body. The upper and back sides are blackened by fire.
Reg. no. 16999/1.
Context and date: the destruction layer in Locus 1357,
square C.20. This is a space near the stairs in the so-called
eastern annex of bUilding 32 (cf. figurine no. 259 above).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
270. A body of type C.1 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1974).
The chest is protruding, but without a clear separation
between the breasts. The hands are placed at the upper side
of the chest. The base is damaged and concave. Reg. no.
15923/1.
Context and date: Locus 1115.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
271. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1973).
The right breast is damaged and the arms are broken, but
traces of their attachment to the chest remain. The section of
the neck shows the peg ofthe head. Reg. no. 14060/1.
Context and date: Locus 1602 (=1345), a white floor in the
area of the storehouses. Level II?
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
272. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1974).
Both arms are missing, but changes of color indicate that
they were placed beneath the breasts. Reg. no. 16632/1.
Context and date: Locus 2003, possibly a room in a house in
the northern quarter.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
273. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1970).
The breasts are damaged and both arms are missing, but
changes of color indicate that they were placed beneath the
breasts. Few traces of white-wash. Reg. no. 2293/1.
Context and date: Locus 292, unified with 290. This is the
street north of the storehouse. Level II.
199
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
274. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1973).
It is concave and covered with white-wash. Reg. no.
12063/1.
Context and date: Locus 479, a room near house 416,
perhaps part of this house or of a nearby one. Level II, 8th
century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
275. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1971).
It is concave and covered with white-wash. Reg. no. 6503/2
(?).
Context and date: not clear. The reg. no. is probably wrong,
thus I could not locate this figurine in the excavation's
records.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
276. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1973
or 1972). It is concave and covered with white-wash. Reg.
no. 11511/1.
Context and date: Locus 1261 (=1628), a room in the cellars
house 32 (cf. figurine no. 259 above).
Note: the excavators ascribed this fragment to level VI,
under house 32.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
277. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba (season 1973).
It is concave, but only the central part remained. Reg. no.
7714/1.
Context and date: Locus 808a (?), a room in a four-roomed
house near the casemate wall. Locus 808a was ascribed to
level III, but the date and the nature of room 808 are not
clear (the area was not yet published).
Note: a model-bed was found in locus 808, above 808a (reg.
no. 7613/1), as well as a "pillar" base no. 7698 (but I could
not locate the last).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published.
Other figurines from Tel Beer Sheba. A few other
fragments were mentioned in the diaries of the excavations.
Their descriptions in the diaries fit the JPF, but they could
not be located with the material currently stored at Tel Aviv
(for fragments of other figurines, not JPF, cf. App. 5:
figurines 5.1.2.6, 5.1.4.13, 5.1.5.12-13, 5.1.5.16). The known
details are presented below:
A. A female body of type C.1 or C.2. Locus 1385 (a room?).
Reg. No. 12918/1. Area E. Season 1973.
B. A female body of type C(?). It is fragmented. Locus 1298,
square 0.16, level IV. Reg. no. 12118/1. Season 1973.
C. A base of type C3. Locus 2006, Area C. Level II. Reg. no.
16637/1. Season 1974.
278. A moulded head of type B.4.E from the "Ophel hill",
Jerusalem. It has four ridges without curls above the
forehead. Above them are tassels or perhaps a veil (?).
Context and date: unknown.
Notes: Pilz, Pritcahrd and Holland thought that the two
drawings of this figurine belonged to two figurines. This was
corrected by Engle. The drawings may not be accurate.
Literature: Vincent 1911: pI. 16:3+5; Pilz 1924: nos.
110+112; Pritchard 1943: nos. 268+274; Holland 1975:
A Vl.d.1; Engle 1979: type VII:34.
279. A moulded head of type B.2.E from the "Ophel hill",
Jerusalem. It has two ridges without curls above the
forehead.
Note: Pilz and Pritcahrd thought that the two drawings of this
figurine belonged to two figurines. This was corrected by
Engle.
Literature: Vincent 1911: pI. 16:2+4; Pilz 1924: nos.
119+111; Pritchard 1943: nos. 269+275; Holland 1975:191,
AVl.b.1; Engle 1979: typeVII:33.
280. A body fragment of type C.2 from Tel Qasileh. It is
exceptional, since the hands hold an object under the
breasts (unlike the few JPF with disks, where the disc covers
at least one breast).
Context: unknown.
Date: level VIII, dated to the ninth century (B. Mazar) or to
the end of 10th century BC (A Mazar).
Literature: Mazar, B. 1951:206f, fig. 13c; Mazar, A 1980:9-
11; Holland 1975: AX.b.69.
Note to figurines nos. 281-286: all these figurines were
found in the excavations of Duncan and Macalister in
Jerusalem, but published in a preliminary way by Duncan
(1931). They were later 'forgotten', and were not included in
the works of Pritchard, Holland and Engle.
281. A moulded head and upper body of type B from
Jerusalem. Only a photograph of its profile was published,
without textual discussion. The details of the hair and the
face cannot be clearly seen, but it seems that it is a female
figurine that has a protruding wig or hair and breasts. This
would fit a JPF.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: lower row,
center.
282. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem. It has
deep eye depressions and its back is rounded.
Context and date: unknown.
See note preceding figurine no. 281.
Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: upper row, right.
283. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem.
Context and date: unknown.
See note preceding figurine no. 281.
Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: top row, third
from the right.
284. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem. It is
flattened from above.
200
Context and date: unknown.
See note preceding figurine no. 281.
Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: top row, second
from the right (and inscribed "WNN 6"?).
285. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem.
Context and date: unknown.
See note preceding figurine no. 281.
Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: top row, left.
286. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem. Its left side is
damaged, as well as the base (on which a number is
inscribed: 9B277?). The left hand is missing.
Context and date: unknown.
See note preceding figurine no. 281.
Literature: Duncan 1931:87, pI. facing p.77: lower row, right.
287. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from
Jerusalem. Its publlcatlon was very brief.
Context and date: unknown.
Note: this might be a figurine in the Rockefeller museum, no.
P.1091, whose origin is not registered in the museum's card.
Literature: Bliss 1898:264, pI. 27:50; Holland 1975: Al.a.54.
288. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem. Its publication was
very brief.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Bliss 1898:264, pI. 27:49; Holland 1975: A.X.b.44.
289. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A from Jerusalem. The
published photograph is not clear.
Context and date: unknown. The excavators mentioned
many figurines found in an area, where Imlk stamps were
also found. They suggested that the figurines are goddesses.
But the exact locus and stratigraphy were not published.
Literature: Macalister and Duncan 1926:187, fig. 197:right;
Duncan 1925: fig. 18: right; Holland 1975: All.c.6; Engle
1979: type VII:32.
290. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem. The arms are
missing. The number "9B (22A)" is written on the base.
Context and date: unknown, probably area 9.
Literature: Macalister and Duncan 1926:184, fig. 194;
Duncan 1924:179, fig. 6b; Holland 1975: AX1.42.
291. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Jerusalem. It has
white-wash and red paint on the side-locks.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Duncan 1925: fig. 18:left; Holland 1975: AlIl.d.8;
Engle 1979: 1:26.
292. A moulded head of type B from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). It is covered with white-wash and red paint on
the face. The hair is arranged in a simple coiffure, long at the
sides. It is an exceptional form.
Context: unknown.
Place: Toronto.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 6:13, A VIII. b.1; Engle 1979:
type VII:38.
293. A body part of type B.2? from Samaria.
Context and date: area S.5B, in debris without a clear
stratigraphy. Season 1910.
Note: Thi~ is probably not a JPF fragment, but a figurine of a
type which has long side-locks reaching the shoulders (cf.
figurine no. 147 above). I have included it here just for the
sake of being cautious.
Literature: Samaria 1:384, reg. no. 3318; Holland 1975:
AX.a.12.
294. A moulded head of type B.2.G from Jerusalem. It is
covered with white-wash but very badly preserved.
According to Holland, it has one row of little, square curls,
above it a second row of large, square curls, and then
another row of rounded curls. There are three round curls in
the side-lock.
Context and date: room 45, from a level with mixed Iron
Age-Hellenistic finds. The nature of the room is not clear, but
it is probably later than the figurine.
Place: London, reg. no. 50/3846.
Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 11:3; Holland
1975: pI. 3:4, AVll.c.1; Engle 1979: type VII:41.
295. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Jerusalem. It is
covered with white-wash but not well preserved. The facial
features are not clear. The peg of the head is clear at the
lower edge of the neck.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 11:4; Holland
1975: pI. 2:8, AIII.d.9; Engle 1979: type 1:2.
296. A moulded head of type B.4?A from Jerusalem. It is
covered with white-wash. There are probably four rows of
curls above the forehead. Other details are not clear from
the publication.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 11:5; Holland
1975: pI. 2:6, AII.h.4; Engle 1979: type 1:3.
297. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem. It has some
remains of white-wash. The base and the right arm are
damaged.
Context and date: room 41 of the lowest level, but the date is
not clear (cf. figurine no. 294 above).
Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 11:2; Holland
1975: pI. 4:2, AX.c.9.
298. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem. It has traces of
white-wash and red paint. The base and the arms are
missing. It was first published by Holland, but was found by
Crowfoot and Fitzgerald.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 3:11, AX. b.45.
299. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem. It is covered with
white-wash and concave. It was first published by Holland,
but was found by Crowfoot and Fitzgerald.
Context and date: unknown.
Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 4:15, AX1.43.
300. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's Excavations). It is well preserved, with some
201
traces of white-wash and red paint on the face. Reg. no.
C391.
Context and date: the entrance to cave I, area A (locus
A966.3Y).
Place: Glasgow, 0.1968.8.
Note: the context is discussed in chapter VIII of this work.
Literature: Holland 1975:96, 344, fig. 6:4, A III.c.4; Holland
1977: fig. 7:1; Engle 1979: 1:17; Jerusalem II: frontispiece
photograph.
301. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's Excavations). It is well preserved, with traces of
white-wash and red paint on the face. It has five rows of little
curls above the forehead. The side-locks have 2-3 columns
with four curls. Reg. no. 7366.
Context: the entrance to cave I, area A (locus A966.3Y, cf.
figurine no. 300 above).
Place: exhibited in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem, 1M 68-
803.
Literature: Holland 1975:344, fig. 6:6, AlIl.d.7; Holland
1977:139, fig. 7:2; Engle 1979: 1:16.
302. A moulded head of type B from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
Excavations). The face is missing; perhaps they felled off the
head. ThUS, the head cannot be classified exactly. Reg. no.
C790.
Context and date: cave I, area A
Place: Leeds.
Literature: Holland 1975:203, fig. 13:9, AXll.rA; Holland
1977:139, fig. 7:7.
303. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
Excavations). Its base is concave and damaged. Both arms
are broken, but one was probably uplifted (according to the
shape of the remaining stump). Reg. no. C365.
Context and date: cave I, area A
Place: Romema, 1M no. 68-791.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:196, vol. 11:99, fig. 10:5,
AX.i.2; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:5.
304. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
Excavations). Its base is concave and damaged. Both arms
are broken, but their stumps remained under the breasts.
Reg. no. C777.
Context and date: cave I, area A
Place: Oxford.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:195, vol. 11:12, 98, fig. 9:1,
AX.b.41; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:3.
305. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
Excavations). There are traces of white-wash and red slip.
Both arms are broken, but marks of their placement under
the breasts remain. Reg. no. C774.
Context: cave I.
Place: Otago.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1196, vol. 11:98, fig. 9:3,
AX.b.43; Holland 1977:139, fig. 7:4.
306. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
Excavations). Its base is concave and damaged. Both arms
are broken. The body was broken and mended after
discovery. Reg. no. C335-6.
Context: cave I, area A
Place: Oxford, 1969.704.
Note: the body is partially hollow, since the base is very
concave. It is still made in the regular JPF pillar technique,
and different from the wheel-made bodies of neighboring
figurines (for which cf. app. 4-5).
Literature: Kenyon 1974: pI. 59 (?); Holland 1975: vol. 1197,
vol. 11:100, fig. 12:4, pI. 4:12, AX1.38; Holland 1977:139, fig.
7:6.
307. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Jerusalem
(Avigad's Excavations). Only a photograph was published.
At least three rows of curls are visible.
Context: not published.
Literature: Avigad 1970: pI. 4c; Holland 1975: AII.a.4; Engle
1979: type 1:9.
308. A whole figurine of type BC.2.B from Jerusalem
(Avigad's Excavations). The base is concave. Both arms are
reconstructed. The breasts are exaggerated. There are two
rows of large, square curls above the forehead (the edge-of-
mould line above them was defined as another row of curls
by Holland). The side-locks have two columns of 2-3 similar
curls. Avigad called this figurine "the Venus of Jerusalem",
and thought that it represented a general fertility goddess,
but in a magical use. Reg. no. 8433-5.
Context: not published,
Place: Israel Museum.
Literature: Avigad 1970: pI. 30b; Avigad 1972:93
photograph; Avigad 1980:36, photograph 15; Holland 1975:
183f, All.a.5; Engle 1979: type 1:36.
309. A base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992). Reg.
no. 766.
Context: locus 131, a domestic area.
Note: figurine no. 464 (below) was found in the same locus.
Place: 1M.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy A De-Groot.
310. A base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992). Reg.
no. 1941.
Context: locus 2195, a domestic area.
Place: 1M.
Literature: as figurine no. 309 above.
311. A base of type C.3 from Ramot (season 1992). Reg.
no. 13763.
Context: locus 2195, a domestic area.
Place: 1M.
Literature: as figurine no. 309 above.
312. A body fragment of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). One arm remained, holding an object (?). Reg.
no. C777.
Context and date: cave I, area A 8th century BC.
Place: otago.
Literature: Holland 1975:100, fig. 12:3, AX1.37; Holland
1977:139, fig. 7:3.
313. A body fragment of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: Al.a.49 (Without a photograph or a
excavations). One arm and part of the chest remained. Reg. Place: Emory. I could not locate it in the museum's records drawing).
no. C779. (cf. figurine no. 420 below).
Context and date: cave I, area A 8th century BC. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:1, pI. 1:1, Al.a.33. 330. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
Place: Glasgow. (Kenyon's excavations).
Literature: Holland 1975:100, fig. 12:2, AX1.36; Holland 321. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem Context: not published.
1977:139. (Kenyon's excavations). Place: Leeds.
Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: AI. a.50 (without photograph or
314. A body fragment of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Place: Amman. drawing).
excavations). There are some remains of white-wash. Only Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:16, Al.a.32.
part of the chest is preserved. Reg. no. C792. 331. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
Context and date: wash inside cave I, area A 8th century 322. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations).
BC. (Kenyon's excavations). Context: not published.
Place: discarded after excavation. Context: not published. Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Holland 1975:100, pI. 4:11, AX1.35; Holland Place: Birmingham. Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.a.52 (without a photograph or a
1977:139. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:15, Al.a.31. drawing).
315. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's 323. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem 332. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem
excavations). It is a little concave and covered with white- (Kenyon's excavations). (Kenyon's excavations). It is covered with white-wash and
wash. Reg. no. 7460 (according to Holland). Context: not published. traces of red paint on the head and yellow on the "turban".
Context and date: wash at the entrance to cave I, area A 8th Place: Toronto. Context: not published.
century BC. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:4, Al.a.36. Place: Amman.
Place: Dublin, probably JM.608. Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:2; Holland 1975: fig. 3:2, pI.
Note: the museum card gives another number than that 324. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem 1:5,Al.b.3.
given by Holland. (Kenyon's excavations). [Fig. 5:3].
Literature: Holland 1975:100, fig. 12:5, AX1.39; Holland Context: not published.
1977:139. Place: Otago. 333. A hand-made head of type A.3.A from Jerusalem
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:5, Al.a.37. (Kenyon's excavations). It has a turben', painted yellow over
316. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's the white-wash.
excavations). It is a little concave and covered with white- 325. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem Context: not published.
wash. Reg. no. C793. (Kenyon's excavations). Place: Toronto.
Context and date: wash at the entrance to cave I, area A 8th Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:6, Al.c.1.
century BC. Place: Otago.
Place: discarded after excavation. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:6, Al.a.38. 334. A hand-made head of type A+.3.A from Jerusalem
Literature: Holland 1975:100, pI. 4:14, AX1.41; Holland (Kenyon's excavations). It has a turban and side-locks.
1977:139. 326. A hand-made head of type A1Ap from Jerusalem There are some remains of orange, red and purple paint
(Kenyon's excavations). It is badly preserved. above the white-wash. The upper body shows the arms
317. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's Context: not published. supporting the breasts.
excavations). It is a little concave and has traces of white- Place: Emory. I could not locate it there (cf. figurine no. 420 Context: not published.
wash. Reg. no. C796. below). Place: St. Andrews.
Context and date: wash at the entrance to cave I, area A 8th Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:7, Al.a.39. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:7, pI. 1:6, Al.c.2.
century BC.
Place: discarded after excavation. 327. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem 335. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Jerusalem
Literature: Holland 1975:100, pI. 4:13; AX1.40, Holland (Kenyon's excavations). (Kenyon's excavations). It has few traces of white-wash.
1977:139. Context: not published. Note: it was 're-published' by Amr.
Place: Leeds. Context: not published.
318. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem Note: the head is very small, and may have belonged to a Place: Amman.
(Kenyon's excavations). It is a little pointed backwards. figurine of a rider. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:8, Al.c.3; Amr 1988: no. 10,
Context: not published. ~ Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:15, Al.a.31. fig. 12.
Place: otago.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:3, Al.a.35. 328. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem 336. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). (Kenyon's excavations). It has few traces of white-wash and
319. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem Context: not published. red paint.
(Kenyon's excavations). It is a little pointed backwards and Place: Leeds. Context: not published.
flattened at the top. Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.a.48 (without either a Place: St. Andrews.
Context: not published. photograph or a drawing). Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:9, pI. 1:7, Al.c.4.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:2, A.l.a.34. 329. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem 337. A moulded head of type B.1? from Shechem. It is not
(Kenyon's excavations). well preserved, and some of the details are not clear from
320. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem Context: not published. the report. It has few traces of white-wash and red paint.
(Kenyon's excavations). Place: Sheffield.

202 203
There is probably one, or two rows of curls (rounded or
square) above the forehead. The side-locks are worn.
Context: not clear.
Place: Leiden, museum no. 1-185.
Note: there is some doubt about the classification of this
head as a JPF.
Literature: Kerkhof 1969: fig. 24:5; Holland 1975:184,
All.c.13.
338. A hand-made head and upper body of type A 1.A from
Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). It is covered with white-
wash. Only the shoulders and a stump of the right arm
remained from the body.
Context: not published.
Place: Otago.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:1, Al.a.17.
339. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). Reg. no. 7376.
Context and date: locus 14.33, area L. This locus was
related to "Early Jewish Iron Age C" assemblages, Le., Iron
Age finds from later fills of the Herodian buildings
(Jerusalem 1:2).
Place: Toronto.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:2, Al.a.18; Jerusalem I: fig.
9:12.
340. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations).
Context: not published.
Place: Oxford.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:3, Al.a.19.
341. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is covered with white-wash and
bands of red and yellow paint.
Context: not published.
Place: Sr. Andrews.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:4, Al.a.20.
342. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It has some remains of white-wash.
Context: not published,
Place: Romema, IAA 68-797. According to the card at
Romema, the reg. no. is 6809 from locus A957.7.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:5, Al.a.21.
343. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations).
Context: not published.
Place: Otago.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:6, Al.a.22.
344. A hand-made head of type A 1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations).
Context: not published.
Place: Toronto.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:7, Al.a.23.
345. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations).
204
Context: not published.
Place: Birmingham.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:8, Al.a.24.
346. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). Reg. no. 3791.
Context: locus 713.42, area L, "Early Jewish lAc" (cf. figurine
no. 339 above).
Place: St. Andrews.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:9, Al.a.25; Jerusalem I: fig.
12:15.
347. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). There are remains of red and yellow
painting.
Context: not published.
Place: Durham WM.619. According to the museum card, the
reg. no. is 6816 from locus A957.18.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:10, Al.a.26.
348. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is very small and has the remains
of white-wash and yellow paint.
Context: not published.
Place: discarded after excavation.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:11, Al.a.27.
349. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations).
Context: not published.
Place: Sheffield.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:12, Al.a.28.
350. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is pointed and has traces of white-
wash and red paint. Reg. no. 3889.
Context: locus 159.17 in area L. "Early Jewish lAc", cf.
figurine no. 339 above.
Place: discarded after excavation.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:13, Al.a.29; Jerusalem I: fig.
9:9.
351. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of white-
wash.
Context and date: locus L.853.7, "Early Jewish Iron Age d",
i.e., Iron Age finds from fills of the Roman period and later
periods (Jerusalem 1:2).
Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-822~
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:14, AI."'.30; Jerusalem I: fig.
12:12.
352. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of white-
wash.
Context: not published.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:9, Al.a.41.
353. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). Reg. no. 7371.
Context and date: locus L.14.34, "Early Jewish lAc", cf.
figurine no. 339 above.
Place: Melbourne.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:10, Al.a.42; Jerusalem I: fig.
9:11.
354. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of white-
wash.
Context: not published.
Place: Sheffield.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:11, Al.a.43.
355. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations).
Context: not published.
Place: Sidney.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:12, A.l.a.44.
356. A hand-made head of type A 1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations).
Context: not published.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:13, Al.a.45.
357. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations).
Context: not published.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:14, Al.a.46.
358. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains of white-
wash. Reg. no. 7218.
Context: locus L.332.22, "Early Jewish lAc", cf. figurine no.
339 above.
Place: Melbourne.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 2:15, Al.a.47; Jerusalem I: fig.
9:10.
359. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from
Jerusalem (Kenyon's excavations). There are some remains
of white-wash. The body is exceptional: the hands held an
object, probably a disk.
Context: not published.
Place: Oxford.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 1:4, pI. 1:9, Al.g.1.
360. A body of type C.1.D from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). There are some remains of white-wash. The
base is damaged. The hands hold a large disk close to the
body. The disk is painted with red and black.
Context: not published.
Place: Toronto.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 10:2, Al.g.2.
[Fig. 4:3].
361. A body of type C.1. D from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The hands held an object close to the body,
probably a disk. The head is missing, but Holland noted that
it was hand-made, perhaps since there is no evident of a peg
in the section of the neck.
Context: not published.
205
Place: Dublin, possibly WM.622. If so, it is reg. no. 6612
from locus AA.105.14c (according to the museum's card).
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 10:2, Al.g.3.
362. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is rounded and surrounded by a
simple turban.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:1, AI. b.2.
363. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is rounded and surrounded by a
turban. There are some remains of yellow, red and white
paint.
Context: locus L.158.16, "Early Jewish lAd", cf. figurine no.
351 above.
Place: Otago.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:3, Al.b.4; Jerusalem I: fig.
12:13.
364. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is rounded and surrounded by a
simple turban.
Context: not published.
Note: this head was 're-published' by Amr.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:4, Al.b.5; Amr 1988: no. 9,
fig. 11.
365. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is rounded and surrounded by a
simple turban. The face is worn.
Context: not published.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-813. According to the Romema
card, it is reg. no. 3338 from locus A953.13.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:5, Al.b.6.
366. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is pointed and has an applied hat,
now broken. There are white-wash and the remains of paint.
Context: not published.
Place: St. Andrews.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 3:11, Al.d.4.
367. A hand-made head of type A5.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It has an applied, pointed hat and
applied side-locks. There are some remains of white-wash
and red paint. Holland thought that it is a male figure with a
beard.
Context: area A, but an exact locus was not published.
Place: Oxford.
Literature: Holland 1975:181, fig. 3:12, Al.e.1.
[Fig. 5:7].
368. A hand-made head of type A5.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is quite similar to figurine no. 367
above, but badly preserved. There are some remains of
white-wash and brown paint on the forehead and on the right
eye. There is probably a beard, and thus it might be a male
figure and not a JPF.
Context: area A, but an exact locus was not pUblished.
Place: Dublin.
Literature: Holland 1975:181, fig. 3:13, Al.e.2.
369. A hand-made head of type A4.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It has an applied, pointed hat with a
sort of a tassel at its edge. There are some remains of red
paint around the hat, but no sign of a beard.
Context: not published.
Place: Birmingham, 1962.A.346. According to the museum's
card, the reg. no. is 79 from locus A301.12, a mixed locus.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:8; Holland 1975:181, fig.
3:10, Al.d.3.
370. A moulded head of type B.3.A from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). Its right and lower sides are broken.
There are the remains of an orange slip. The drawing shows
only two rows of curls, but Holland counted three. Reg. no.
901.
Place: Holland gave the place as Amman, but it is in Oxford,
579.1962.
Context: not published.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 6:1, All. a.3; Engle 1979: type
111:4.
371. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). There are the remains of white-
wash. The nose is damaged and the hair and the face are
worn. The side-locks are either worn or simple.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Note: 're-published' by Amr.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:7; Holland 1975: fig. 6:2,
Alll.b.2; Engle 1979: type 1:15; Amr 1988: 185, no. 1, figs.
1:1,2:1.
372. A moulded head of type B.3.B from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is very damaged, and I followed
Holland's classification.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman, J.9698.
Note: It is not clear how Engle classified this head, since the
eyes are very worn.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 6:3, pI. 2:7, AlIl.b.3; Engle
1979: type V:106.
373. A moulded head of type B.4.B from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is worn and the upper part, the
nose and the chin are damaged.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Note: 're-published' by Amr.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 6:5, Alll.d.6; Engle 1979: type
1:18; Amr 1988: 185, no. 2, figs. 1:2,2:2.
374. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is a little worn out. Holland
classified it as having vertical curls, though they appear as
square in the drawing. I followed Holland, since he could
check the head itself.
206
Context: not published.
Place: St. Andrews.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:3; Holland 1975: fig. 6:7, pI.
3:1, AIV.d.1; Engle 1979: type 111:3.
375. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Jerusalem.
(Kenyon's excavations). It is fairly well preserved, except a
damaged nose. The side-locks are a-symmetrical.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:4; Holland 1975: vol. 11:96,
fig. 6:9, AIV.d.3; Engle 1979: type 111:2.
[Fig. 6:3].
376. A moulded head of type B.3.C from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is fairly well preserved, except a
broken right side.
Context: not published.
Place: Ecole Biblique.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:5; Holland 1975: vol. 11:96,
fig. 6:8, pI. 3:2, AIV.d.2; Engle 1979: type 111:1.
377. A moulded head of type B.1-2 from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). There are the remains of white-wash
and red paint on the face, and two ridges above the
forehead. There are no curls. The side-locks also lack curls.
Context: not published.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 68-811. According to the card at
Romema, the reg. no. is 3337 from locus 840.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 6:10, AVl.a.2; Engle
1979: type IV:7.
378. A moulded head of type B.5.E? from Jerusalem
(Kenyon's excavations). It is fairly well preserved, except a
broken left side. There are some remains of white-wash and
red paint on the face. It has five ridges above the forehead,
probably without curls. Reg. no. 3507.
Context: locus A156A
Place: Romema.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 9:6; Holland 1975:191, vol.
11:96, fig. 6:12, AVl.e.2; Engle 1979: type 1:14.
379. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The base and the breasts are a little damaged.
There are red bands on the neck and black paint on the
breasts, and the fingers of the hands are marked in black.
Reg. no. 792.
Context: not published.
Note: 're-published' by Amr.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:4; Holland 1975:22, fig. 8:1,
AX.b.23; Amr 1988: no. 4; Franken 1989:197.
380. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Only the chest and the stumps of the arms
remained. There are some traces of white-wash.
Context: not published.
Place: Dublin.
Literature: Holland 1975: 11:96, fig. 7:1, AX.a.4.
381. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The base is very damaged. There are some
traces of white-wash.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 7:2, AX.a.5.
382. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The chest and the arms remained. There are
some traces of white-wash.
Context and date: locus L.912.30, "Early Jewish lAd", cf.
figurine no. 351 above.
Place: Glasgow.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 7:3, AX.b.14;
Jerusalem I: fig. 12:19.
383. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Only one breast and the right arm remained.
Context and date: locus L.332.18a, "Early Jewish lAc", cf.
figurine no. 339 above.
Place: Leeds.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 7:4, AX.b.15;
Jerusalem I: fig. 9:8.
384. A body of type C.2.D from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The figure probably held a disk.
Context: not published.
Place: Dublin.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 7:5, pI. 3:5, AX.b.16.
385. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). It is broken under the chest. The arms are
broken, except stumps.
Context: not published,
Place: Amman.
Note: 're-published' by Amr.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 7:6, AX.b.17; Amr
1988: no. 3, figs. 3, 4:3.
386. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The right arm and the breast are broken. Reg.
no. 3973.
Context and date: locus L.457.23, "Early Jewish Iron Age a",
i.e., Iron Age finds in-situ, from quarries and loci on the
bedrock (Jerusalem 1:2).
Place: Sheffield.
Note: the excavators believed in the theory that Jerusalem
was quite a small town, and that area L was not really
settled during the Iron Age. In view of the newer excavations
and surveys, this theory can no longer be accepted.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:96, fig. 7:7, AX.b.18;
Jerusalem I: fig. 4:13.
387. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). There are traces of red paint on the back. The
peg is clearly seen in the section of the neck. Reg. no. 3342.
Context and date: locus L.609.5, "Early Jewish lAd", cf.
figurine no. 351 above.
Place: Romema, 1M. no. 68-814.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 7:8, AX.b.19;
Jerusalem I: fig. 12:17.
207
388. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The breasts and the right hand remained.
There are some traces of white-wash.
Context: not published.
Note: 're-published' by Amr.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 7:9, AX.b.20; Amr
1988: no. 6, fig. 8.
389. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The base and the breasts are Whole, but the
right arm is broken. Reg. no. 3339.
Context: not published.
Place: Romema, 1M. no. 68-807, now in an exhibition.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:6; Holland 1975: fig. 7:10,
AX.b.21.
390. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The base and the breasts are a little damaged.
The neck is thick and long.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman, no. J.9702.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:3; Holland 1975: vol. 11:97,
fig. 7:11, pI. 3:6, AX.b.22.
391. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The base is damaged.
Context: not published.
Place: Birmingham.
Note: this may be museum no. 1962A906 at Birmingham,
and then the locus is A1 08.1 and the reg. no. is 797.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:2, AX.b.24.
392. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The base is missing.
Context: not published.
Place: Louisville.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:3, AX.b.25.
393. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations).
Context: not published.
Place: Dublin.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:4, AX.b.26.
394. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The arms and the breasts remained. Reg. no.
4169.
Context and date: locus L.608.18, "Early Jewish Iron Age b"
assemblage, i.e., fills from the Iron Age period, above the
"Iron Age a" assemblages.
Place: Romema. 1M no. 68-816.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:5, AX.b.27;
Jerusalem I: fig. 6:12.
395. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The base and the right arm are missing. Reg.
no. 5432.
Context and date: locus L.369.13, "Early Jewish lAd", cf.
figurine no. 351 above.
Place: Sheffield.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:6, AX.b.28;
Jerusalem I: fig. 12:14.
396. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Reg. no. 5463.
Context and date: locus L.371.2, "Early Jewish lAd", cf.
figurine no. 351 above.
Place: Dublin.
Note: I could not locate this figurine despite the
correspondence with the museum.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:7, AX.b.29;
Jerusalem I: fig. 12:16.
397. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The arms and the chest remained.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman, no. J.9699.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 11:97, fig. 8:8, AX.b.30.
398. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The hands are broken, but marks indicate their
placement under the breasts. A small central part of the
concave base remained. Reg. no. 4373.
Context and date: locus L.159.32, "Early Jewish lAb", cf.
figurine no. 394 above.
Note: 're-published' by Amr.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 8:9, AX.b.31; Jerusalem I: fig.
6:14; Amr 1988: no. 5, fig. 6.
399. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The base is damaged, but the arms are whole.
Context: not pubtished.
Place: Oxford, probably no. 1964.522. If so, it is reg. no.
2033.
Literature: Kenyon 1967: fig. 10:5; Holland 1975: fig. 8:10,
AX.b.32.
400. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Only the breast and the arms survived.
Context: not published.
Place: Melbourne.
Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 3:10, AX.b.35.
401. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The hands support the breasts. The
depression of the peg can probably be seen at the top of the
body. Reg. no. 5108.
Context and date: locus L.711.2, "Early Jewish lAd", cf.
figurine no. 351 above.
Place: St. Andrews.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 8:11, AX.b.33; Jerusalem I: fig.
12:18.
402. A body of type C.1 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The base is damaged and the right arm is
missing.
Context: not published,
Place: St. Andrews.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 8:12, AX.b.34.
208
403. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Either a Photograph or a drawing was not
published.
Context: not published.
Place: St. Andrews.
Note: I have classified figurines nos. 403-407 as C.2 bodies,
but some of them may be whole bodies (C.1). Too few
details were published to decide.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX.b.36.
404. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Further details were not published (cf. figurine
no. 403).
Place: Leeds.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX.b.37.
405. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Further details were not published (cf. figurine
no. 403).
Place: discarded after excavation.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX.b.38.
406. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Further details were not published (cf. figurine
no. 403).
Place: Philadelphia.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX.b.39.
407. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Further details unknown (cf. figurine no. 403).
Place: Leeds.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX.bAO.
408. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Only the left arm and breast remained.
Context: not published.
Place: Leeds.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:2, AX.bA2.
409. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations ).
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Note: this is probably no. 8 of Amr, but without locus- and
registration- numbers, the identification is not certain.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:6, AX.c.3; Amr 1988: no. 8,
fig. 10 (?).
410. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The arms and the righLbreast remained, but
the left breast is broken. Reg. no. 3509.
Context: locus A669.2.6.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-812.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:7, AX.c.4.
411. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The arm and the left breast remained.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Note: this is probably no. 7 of Amr, but loci and reg. nos.
were not published.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:8, AX.c.5; Amr 1988:187,
no.7, fig. 9?
412. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The arms support the breasts.
Context: not published,
Place: Birmingham.
Note: this is probably museum no. 1966.A.101, reg. no.
4444 from locus R.845.7.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:9, AX.c.6.
413. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Most of the body remained, except the base
and the neck. A small part of the concave base can be seen
as well. Reg. no. 5890.
Context: locus A 955.18.
Note: the design of the arms is exceptional, since they
descend down from the chest, with the left hand placed on
the abdomen.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-821.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:10, AXc.7.
414. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Only the right arm and part of the chest
remained.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:11, AX.c.8.
415. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations ).
Context: not published.
Place: discarded after the excavation.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 10:9, AX1.17.
416. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The arms are missing, but the marks of the
hands on the chest are clear.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:1, pI. 4:7, AX1.19.
417. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The arms are missing.
Context: not published.
Place: discarded after the excavation.
Note: the published drawing is not very clear, thus the
definition of this fragment as a JPF is doubted.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:196, fig. 11:2, AX1.20.
418. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The arms are missing, but probably supported
the breasts in origin.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:3, AX1.21.
419. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The arms are missing, but the protruding
breast of a woman is clear.
Context: not published.
209
Place:St. Andrews.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:4, AX1.22.
420. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations ).
Context: not published.
Place: Emory.
Notes: I could not locate this fragment in the museum of
Emory University (cf. figurines nos. 320, 326 above).
According to Holland, it is a fragment of a female figurine
with a peg.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:5, AX1.23.
421. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The protruding breast is clear.
Context: not published.
Place: Leeds.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:6, pI. 4:7, AX1.24.
422. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations ).
Context: not published.
Place: discarded after excavation.
Note: the drawing is not clear, but Holland described this
fragment as a female.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:7, AX1.25.
423. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The breasts are damaged and only stumps
remained from the arms.
Context: not published.
Place: discarded after excavation.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:8, AX1.26.
424. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations ).
Context: not published.
Place: Leeds.
Note: the hands probably hold a disk, cf. figurines nos. 359-
361, 384 above. This may be fragment no. 1329 from locus
C.6.19.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:9, AX1.27.
425. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations ).
Context: not published.
Place: discarded after excavation.
Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 4:8, AX1.28.
426. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations ).
Context: not published.
Place: Louisville.
Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 4:9, AX1.29.
427. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations ).
Context: not published, but possibly locus AA.101.22.
Place: Leeds.
Literature: Holland 1975: pI. 4:10, AX1.30.

428. A base of type C.3 from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations).
Context: not published, but possibly locus C.6.8-18 (reg. no.
1133).
Place: Birmingham, probably museum no. 1962.A.907.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 11:10, AX1.31.
429. A body of type C.2? from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). The Drawing is not clear, but Holland
described this fragment as a torso with white-wash and
brown paint on the neck. It is likely to be a JPF fragment.
Context: not published.
Place: Leeds.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:100, AX1.32.
430. A body of type C.? from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Either a drawing or a photograph was not
published, thus an exact classification is not possible.
Context: not published.
Place: Dublin, probably museum no. WM.657, reg. no. 1106
from cave 1.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.33.
431. A body of type C.? from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Either a drawing or a photograph was not
published, thus an exact classification is impossible.
Context: not published.
Place: Sydney.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.34.
432. A body of type C.? from Jerusalem (Kenyon's
excavations). Either a drawing or a photograph was not
published, thus an exact classification is impossible.
Context: not published.
Place: discarded after the excavation.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.44.
433. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem (Lux's
excavations in the Muristan area). Only a photograph was
published. The head has a turban.
Context: not published; remains of the 8th-7th centuries BC,
including /m/k and rosette stamps, were found in the area.
Place: with the excavation team?
Literature: Lux 1972: pI. 22: upper row middle; Holland 1975:
addenda, Al.b.6a.
434. A hand-made head of type A2.A from Jerusalem (Lux's
excavations in the Muristan area). Only a photograph was
published. The head has a turban.
Context: not published; cf. figurine 433 above.
Place: with the excavation team?
Literature: Lux 1972: pI. 22: upper row right; Holland 1975:
addenda, AI. a.53a.
435. A hand-made head of type A3.A from Jerusalem (Lux's
excavations in the Muristan area). Only a photograph was
published. The head has an applied turban and side-locks.
Context: not published; cf. figurine no. 433 above.
Place: with the excavation team?
Literature: Lux 1972: pI. 22: upper row left; Holland 1975:
addenda, Al.c.4a.
210
436. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Jerusalem
(Amiran's and Eitan's excavations in the Citadel). The head
was not mentioned in the text.
Context: not published.
Literature: Amiran and Eitan 1970: pI. 8b; Holland 1975:
Al.a.53.
437. A moulded head of type B.3 from Jerusalem (Ben Dov's
excavations). Only a photograph was published. The head is
badly preserved.
Context: not published.
Literature: Ben Dov 1982:55.
438. A hand-made head of type A1? from Jerusalem (B.
Mazar's excavations in the Temple mount). Either a
photograph or a drawing was not published. Reg. no. 1469.
Context: The head was found in locus R16, whose nature is
not clear.
Place: the Hebrew University?
Literature: Nadelman 1989:125.
439. A body of type C.2 from Jerusalem (B. Mazar's
excavations in the Temple mount). The arms are broken and
the base is damaged. The breasts are small. Reg. no.
746/10.
Context and date: locus 6015, a tomb or a hewn room in the
eastern slope of the "western hill" (see Mazar, E. and B.
1989:49-53). Burial remains were not found. Perhaps it was
cleaned when the city expanded, or was even an unfinished
tomb. 8th-7th centuries BC
Place: Romema, IAA no. 1993-748.
Literature: Nadelman 1989:125, pI. 29:8, 117: photograph
121.
440. A moulded head of type B.1? from Jerusalem (B.
Mazar's excavations in the Temple mount). It is not well
preserved and the nose is damaged.
Context: The head was found in area IV in 1977 (square
EF/15-16), but the date and nature of this locus are not
clear.
Place: the Hebrew University?
Literature: Nadelman 1989:126, photograph 120.
441. A moulded head of type B from Jerusalem (B. Mazar's
excavations in the Temple mount). Either a photograph or a
drawing was not published. Reg. no. 296K.
Context: locus 15026, whose nature is not clear.
Place: the Hebrew University?
Literature: Nadelman 1989:125.
442. A moulded head of type B.2.A from Arad. It is well
preserved. There are two rows of rounded curls above the
forehead. Reg. no. 5422/1 (according to the diaries of the
excavation in Tel Aviv).
Context: locus 783 in square JH/15. This is the temple area,
but the exact stratigraphy and the nature of the locus were
not yet published.
Place: exhibited at the Prime Minister's office, Jerusalem.
IAA no. 67-968.
Note: according to the Romema card, the reg. no. is 5244.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:52, pI. 41:6, addenda All.c.1;
Engle 1979: type V:165.
443. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from Arad. It is well
preserved.
Context: not published.
Notes: except the preliminary publication, this head was not
included in Holland's and Engle's work. According to the
photograph, it is probably at Romema, IAA no. 64-329. If so,
it is reg. no. 912/1. It is exhibited at the Prime Minister's
office, Jerusalem.
Literature: Aharoni and Amiran 1964:49 photograph; Aharoni
1978: photograph 37.
444. A moulded head and upper body of type B from Arad.
All the upper part of the head is missing, thus it cannot be
classified exactly. The neck is long and thick. The breasts
and the arms are broken, but the hands were placed beneath
the breasts. The face is full, with only one eye and a mouth
still evident. Reg. no. 1080/1.
Context and date: locus 1500 (former 310) in square H/13.
This is a Hellenistic foundation trench south of the temple,
but no doubt it is a secondary context (cf. figurine no. 452
below).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
445. A moulded head of type B.2-3?A? from Arad. All the
left part of the head is missing, and the rest is badly
preserved. There is red slip on the remaining part. Reg. no.
799/1.
Context and date: locus 502, a long room in the residential
area in the south of the citadel. Level IX?
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
446. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Arad. it is small,
rounded and has some traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
1565/4.
Context and date: locus 350 in square G/15, a small room
west of the altar in the temple. Level IX (?).
Note: a zoomorphic figurine (reg. no. 1565) was found in the
same locus, as well as figurine no. 453 below.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
447. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Arad. It is a little
pointed. Reg. no. A495/1.
Context and date: locus 17 in square KU15, a room or a
narrow passage in the north part of the citadel (near the late
casemate wall). The locus was ascribed to level IV, but this
is a preliminary observation only.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
211
448. A hand-made head of type A 1.Ap from Arad. It is
pointed and has some remains of white-wash and red paint
on the upper edge ofthe left eye. Reg. no. 1571/2.
Context and date: locus 380 in square H/14, the area of the
entrance to the temple. The locus was ascribed to level IX.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Note: according to one list of finds, the locus is 388, a little
south of 380.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
449. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Arad. It is a
little pointed and has some remains of white-wash. The right
side is broken along the face and the neck. Reg. no. 6713/1.
Context: locus 931 in square 0/16, collapse above the
glasis, on the slope outside the fortress.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
450. A hand-made head of type A1.Ap from Arad. It is
small, rounded, covered with white-wash and red paint
(except on the neck). Reg. no. 881/1 (?).
Context: square N/16, the area of the storehouse and the city
wall in the north-east part of the fortress. It is probably a
surface find, or one from a mixed locus.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
451. A hand-made head of type A1.A from Arad. It has
some remains of white-wash. Reg. no. C524/1.
Context and date: locus 450 in square H/9, a domestic room
near the wall in the south of the fortress. Level VI.
Place: Romema, IAA 64-306 (?).
Notes: according to a list of figurines made by the
excavators, the locus is 450a. In the Romema card the reg.
no. is 544/1.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
452. A body of type Co2 from Arad. Its right arm is broken
and its left breast is damaged. Reg. no. 6827/1.
Context: square C/11 in the west slope outside the fortress;
locus 1500, a general designation for surface finds or finds
from unstratified locations (cf. figurine no. 444 above).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
453. A body of type C.2 from Arad. The left arm and the left
breast are missing. Reg. no. 1542/1.
Context: locus 350 in the area of the temple, cf. figurine no.
446 above.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
454. A body of type C.2 from Arad. The arms are whole, but
the left breast is damaged. Reg. no. 694/1.
Context and date: locus 429, in the 'industrial' area in the
west of the fortress. It is a fairly large area of small walls and
installations, whose exact function is unknown. Level VIII,
8th century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Note: according to a list made by the excavators, the reg. no.
is 654/1.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
455. A body of type C.2 from Arad. Only the right side of the
body survived. Reg. no. 5574/1.
Context and date: locus 643, a room or court north of the
"Elyashiv house", in the southern part of the fortress. Level
VI, 7th century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
456. A body of type C.2 from Arad. There are remains of
breasts and a hand under the left breast. The lower side of
the body shows the beginning of the concave base. Reg. no.
5355/1.
Context and date: locus 795, a Hellenistic period pit in
squares GH/15 in the center of the fortress; later changed to
locus 1500 (cf. figurines nos. 444, 452 above).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
457. A body of type C.2 from Arad. The arms are broken and
the right breast is damaged, but the hands survived under
the breasts. The peg of the head is seen in the section of the
neck. Reg. no. 1233/1.
Context: locus 512, a domestic (7) room in the south of the
fortress, only partially excavated. The figurine was found at
73.40m., right above the floor (73.25m.). Level X (7).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
458. A base of type C.3 from Arad. It is concave and has
some remains of white-wash. Reg. no. C108/6.
Context and date: locus 408b in square E/11, a room near
the solid wall of the fortress. Level VIII, 8th century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
459. A body of type C.2 from Kh. Geresh. The right arm is
broken and the left breast is a little damaged. Reg. no. 60.
Context and date: locus 19, a domestic room, which was
only partially excavated. The site is an Iron Age village of the
8th-7th centuries BC.
Place: under study with the excavation team, 1M.
Note: four figurines of animals were found in the same room,
as well as figurines nos. 460-461 below.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit.
212
460. A body of type C.2 from Kh. Geresh. Both arms are
broken and the rest is badly preserved. Reg. no. 49.
Context and date: locus 19, cf. figurine no. 459 above.
Place: under study with the excavation team.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit.
461. A base of type C.3 from Kh. Geresh. Reg. no. 71b.
Context and date: locus 19, cf. figurine no. 459 above.
Place: under study with the excavation team.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit.
462. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Kh. 'Anim. It is
rounded and lacks clear depressions for eyes. The nose is
damaged. Reg. no. 475/2.
Context and date: locus 36, an Iron Age locus sealed by a
destruction layer, in the area of the later Synagogue. Two
animal figurines were found in the same locus.
Place: under study with the excavation team.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit.
463. A body of type C.2 from Ramot (season 1992). Part of
the chest remained, and a hand under the left breast. Reg.
no. 2963.
Context and date: locus 1183, a domestic area, 8th-7th
centuries BC.
Place: under study with the excavation team.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot.
464. A base of type C.37 from Ramot (season 1992). Only a
tiny part remained, about 20 mm. high, but it is likely a JPF
fragment. Reg. no. 2737.
Context and date: locus 131, domestic area, 8th-7th
centuries BC.
Place: under study with the excavation team.
Note: figurine no. 309 above was found in the same locus.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot.
465. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Gezer. The head is
pointed. The body is whole, except a few damaged points in
the right breast and the base. The hands meet beneath the
breasts, without supporting them.
Context and date: unknown.
Place: Israel Museum, probably formerly in the Clark
collection. The number 907 is written on the figurine, and the
date 18/2112. Probably it was found in 1912, but it is not
similar to any of the figurines published from Gezer in
Macalister's reports.
Note: there is a possibility that this figurine was acquired in
the antiquities markets.
Literature: courtesy of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem.
466. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from Beth Shemesh.
The head is rounded and the body is well preserved.
Context and date: unknown.
Place: Israel Museum, Jerusalem, no. 90-14-350. Probably it
was formerly in the Clark collection, It carries an inscription
"911 Beth Shemesh 1909".
Notes: This figurine is not similar to any of the figurines from
Beth Shemesh pubtished by Mackenzie. There is some
danger that it was purchased in the antiquities markets.
Literature: courtesy of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem.
467. A body of type C.1 from Mamila (Jerusalem). The arms
are completely missing and the body is broken in the middle
and mended after discovery. Reg. no. 105.
Context and date: locus 11 inside tomb 5, from the floor of
the central collection area. It is not easy to date this tomb
exactly, but the general range is the 8th-7th centuries BC,
perhaps rather later than early in this range.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 91-2159.
Note: figurine no. 468 (below) was found in the same locus.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Reich.
468. A body of type C.1 from Mamila (Jerusalem). The right
arm is missing. Reg. no. 84.
Context: locus 11 inside tomb 5, cf. figurine no. 467 above.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 91-2153.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Reich.
469. A body of type C.1 from Mamila (Jerusalem). The arms
are missing. Reg. no. 19.
Context and date: a tomb excavated in 1927, while preparing
the foundations for a building of the electricity company.
Amiran defined the type as Judean in the publication, but the
shape of the tomb is unknown. Other than the figurine, only
a few vessels were published, from the 8th-7th centuries BC.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 52-99.
Note: I could not locate this figurine now.
Literature: Amiran 1956:177, no. 19; pI. C:19.
470. A moulded head of type B.17.A7 from Tel Beer Sheba.
The hairdress details are very worn out, but one ridge of
curls is still evident (their shape is not clear). The side-locks
probably had one column of curls. The eyes are very large.
Reg. no. 15853/1.
Context: locus 38, the long circling street in the west part of
the city.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 1993-17 (formerly 1-4613).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
471. A body of type C.2 from Tel 'Ira (Excavations of Biran
and Cohen). Reg. no. 4572.
Context: locus 1580, probably a domestic area.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit Arieh.
472. A fragment of a hand-made head of type A.1.Ap from
Maresha. About half of the head survived, covered with
bands of white-wash. The wash leaves a sort of a blank
circle in the depression of the eye (only one eye remained),
perhaps indicating the pupil. Reg. no. 1386XV.
Context and date: on the bedrock in cave 75, together with
Iron Age material (including /m/k stamps). The nature of the
locus is unknown, and the cave was used in later periods.
Place: with the excavation team.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. Kloner and T.
Levin.
473. A moulded head of type B from Mamila (Jerusalem). It
is badly preserved. There are probably two rows of rounded,
large curls above the forehead, with a third row of much
smaller curls above them. The side-locks have two columns
of curls. Reg. no. 231.
213
Context and date: locus 35 in area F, debris of a Byzantine
period bath.
Place: with the excavation team.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Reich.
474. A body of type C.2 from Mevaseret Jerusalem (Mo~a).
One arm is missing.
Context: surface find by "Mr. Leon".
Place: Romema, 1M no. 62-312, now unknown.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Israel
Antiquities Authority.
475. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Arad. It is
pointed and protrudes backwards. Reg. no. 64/1.
Context: locus 414, a small room near the late wall in square
F/9, the domestic area in the south of the fortress.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-609.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
476. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Arad. It is
pointed and protrudes backwards. Reg. no. 339/1.
Context and date: locus 448 in square G/11, the south west
part of the fortress. Level VII, 7th century BC.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-610.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
477. A body of type C.2 from Arad. Its left part is missing.
The peg of the head can be seen in the section of the neck.
Reg. no. 718/1.
Context and date: locus 452a, part of a building in square
G/9. Level VIII.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-608.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
478. A body of type C.2 from Arad. The breasts are
damaged and the hands do not meet each other. Reg. no.
560/1 or 923/2 (7).
Context: not clear.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-607.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
479. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from
Arad. The head is rounded. The breasts are supported by the
arms. Reg. no. 560211.
Context: not clear.
Place: Exhibited in the Prime Minister's office, Jerusalem.
1M no. 67-611.
Note: This figurine is missing from the list made by the
excavators, or perhaps the reg. no. is mistaken.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
480. A body of type C.1 from Arad. The chest is made as
one part, without a separation of breasts. The arms are
broken and the base is damaged. Reg. no. 786/1.
Context: not clear.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 67-326.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
481. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel Beer Sheba.
The upper part is missing, but the eye depressions and a
small part of the neck survived. Reg. no. 15431/1. IAA no.
93-414.
Context: not clear; perhaps a tomb (?).
Place: Tel Aviv?
Note: the size alone indicates that it is clearly a JPF head,
and not a rider's head.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
482. A moulded head of type B from Tel Michal. Nor the
drawing in the report, neither the photograph in the Romema
card allow clear classification. The head has a hairdress or
wig of vertical curls (the number of rows of curls is not
clear). It was compared with Holland's types A-B heads. The
report stated that there was a peg, from which the existence
of a hollow body was assumed (but solid JPF bodies were
related to heads with pegs as well). Reg. no. 6414/1. IAA
no. 90-728.
Context and date: silo 955 in square F/15. There are no
building remains nearby. Level VI, the Persian period.
Place: currently unknown.
Notes: According to the report, the head was made in a
double mould. Though this cannot be seen from the drawing,
it suggests a hollow head. This would fit well the late dating
and also the shape (cf. a head from Gileam, App. 5.VI.5.3
below). Thus, it is probably not a JPF head, and I have
included it only for reasons of doubt.
Literature: Kertesz 1989:361, fig. 32:3, pI. 78:3.
483. A moulded head of type B.3.A? from Tel Muleiha (Tel
el-Milh) near Beit Qamah. It has three rows of curls,
probably rounded. The side-locks have one column of four
curls.
Context: surface find.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 55-11.
Note: when the head was joined with the body, the potter
covered the area cruedly, creating a sort of a ridge at the
lower end of the face.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Israel
Antiquities Authority.
484. A moulded head of type B.3.A-B? from the Beduin Suq
area in Beer Sheba. It is well preserved, with a pointed "hat"
decorated by a band of paint. There are three rows of curls
(worn). The side-lock has two columns of five square curls.
Context: the head was found in 1955 in a pit. Animal
figurines and at least one Im/k stamp were found in this pit,
but its nature and exact date cannot be established.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 93-1222 (formerly 70-5498).
Literature: Ofer 1954 (without page nos.); Ofer 1957:10-11,
photograph p. 11; Ofer 1965:31.
485. A moulded head of type BA from the Beduin Suq area
in Beer Sheba. Its left side is damaged. There are four rows
of curls above the forehead; the upper is smaller and has
214
rectangular curls. The side-locks probably has two columns
of five rectangular, or square curls.
Context: cf. figurine no. 484 above.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 93-1223 (formerly 70-5497).
Literature: Ofer 1965:31; Ofer 1954 (without page nos.); Ofer
1957:10-11(without a photograph or a drawing).
486. A moulded head of type BA? from the Beduin Suq area
in Beer Sheba. It has a long neck and a peg. Either a
photograph or a drawing was not published.
Context: cf. figurine no. 484 above.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 93-1225 (formerly 70-5499).
Exhibited in Yad-Meir.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 484 above.
487. A base of type C.3 from the Beduin Suq area in Beer
Sheba. Either a photograph or a drawing was not published.
Ofer wrote that this base does not mend with any of the
heads found at the site. This indicates that Ofer assumed,
that the base may fit a JPF.
Context: cf. figurine no. 484 above.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Ofer 1957:11.
488-489. Two hand-made heads of type A.2 or A,3 from Tel
en-Nasbeh. Either Photographs or drawings were not
published, but the heads are mentioned as "Astarte" heads
with a hairdress similar to TN I: pI. 86:1-9 (Which are JPF).
According to TN I: app. A, four heads of this type were
found, but not published with a photograph. Perhaps
figurines nos. 128, 138 above are included here, and this
leaves us with at least two other moulded heads of JPF.
Unfortunately, details of date, context or even registartion
numbers were not published.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: 273, Appendix A: section 4.
490-506. Hand-made heads of type A.1.A from Tel en-
Nasbeh. Either photographs or drawings were not published,
but the heads are mentioned in app. A of the report as
"Astarte" heads, pinched and without hairdress. 17 heads
are left after counting off the fully published ones. A few
heads could have belonged to horse and rider figurines.
Unfortunately, the context, date and registration numbers
were not published.
Place: Berkeley?
Note: A few of these heads could be identified with the help
of a list, kindly given to me by Dr. G. Zorn (figurines nos.
490-498 below), but it is a very short and preliminary list.
Literature: TN I: 273, Appendix A, section 2:2.
490. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: cistern 128, square AK/21.
Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.224.
Note: this pit is not mentioned by Zorn (1993), and perhaps
the number is mistaken.
Literature: cf. note above.
491. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: cistern 152, square AJ/22.
Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.350.
Note: this pit is not mentioned by Zorn (1993).
Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).
492. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: cistern 216, square P/17. cf. figurine no. 133 above.
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).
493. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: cistern 216, square P/17, cf. figurines no. 133,492
above.
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).
494. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: cistern 370, square AF/20, cf. figurine no. 169
above.
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).
495. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: room 534, square AC/15. Levell (building 142.01 of
Zorn 1993:1571).
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).
496. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: room 616, square AB/16. This is bUilding 142.04 of
Zorn (1993:1589), defined by him as a mixed locus.
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).
497. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: room 616, cf. figurine no. 496 above.
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).
498. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: room 625a, square AB/17. This is bUilding 142.06
of Zorn (1993:1591), dated by him to the Iron Age II -
Persian periods.
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. note before no. 490 (above).
507-539. Bodies of type C.1 from Tel en-Nasbeh. They are
mentioned in appendix A of the report. The total number of
whole bodies is mentioned as 39 (excluding two whole
figurines which were published in TN I: pis. 86:14, 87:2). Of
these 39 bodies, four were published (ibid: pI. 86:12,16-18).
One exceptional body has an uplifted left arm (two other
exceptional fragments were published, TN I: pI. 86:2, 13). I
have also included figurines nos. 179-180 (above) as
published JPF bodies. This leaves us with at least 33 items,
which have no photographs or drawings in the report.
Unfortunately, the appendix does not give the dates, contexts
and registration numbers of these items. It is very likely that
they are all JPF.
Place: Berkeley?
215
Literature: TN I: 273, Appendix A, section 3. Only one
figurine could be identified with any certainty in the list made
by G. Zorn (no. 507 below).
507. A body of type C.1 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: cistern 156, square AH/20. This is building 177.04
of Zorn (1993:1434f), dated by him to the Iron Age II.
Place: Berkeley, box 5, museum no. MA30.
Literature: cf. the note above.
540-562. Body fragments of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
They are mentioned in appendix A of the report. The total
number is mentioned as 29, but 5 were published adequately
(TN I: pis. 86-87) and another was possibly published (TN I:
pI. 86:16). This leaves us with at least' 23 items, which have
no photographs or drawings in the report. Unfortunately, the
appendix does not give the dates, contexts and registration
numbers of these items. It is very likely that they are all JPF.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: 273, Appendix A, section 3. Few bodies
could be identified in the list made by G. Zorn (nos. 540-543
below). Further fragments are included in the list, but with
too few details to enable positive identifications.
540. A body of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context and ate: cistern 359, square AD/17. Levell.
Place: Berkeley, box 5.
Literature: cf. the note above.
541. A body of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: room 64, square AJ/20. This is building 177.05 of
Zorn (1993:1466), defined by him as mixed Iron-Age -
Persian period locus.
Place: Berkeley. Museum no. M.310.
Literature: cf. the note before figurine 540 (above).
542. A body of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: room 104, square Y/24 (cf. Zorn 1993:1474, with a
dating to the Babylonian - Persian periods).
Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.577.
Literature: cf. the note before figurine 540 (above).
543. A body of type C.2 from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Context: silo 249, square R/17 (cf. Zorn 1993:1629).
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. the note before figurine 540 (above).
563-576. Bases of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. 15 bases
are mentioned in appendix A of the report. Only one base
was published fully (figurine no. 170 above), thus 14 are left.
The appendix makes it clear that these are JPF bases. Of
course, a few could have belonged to bird figurines, or to
riders (as discussed in detail in chapter III of the present
work). Unfortunately, the appendix does not give the dates,
contexts and registration numbers for these bases.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:273, Appendix A, section 4.
Note: Many fragments in the list made by G. Zorn seem to
be JPF bases, and the number is greater then the expected
14 (above). I have defined 14 bases as nos. 563-576 Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.698. Place: Berkeley? Context: square Z/17, room 662, cf. figurine "F" above.
(below). The rest are presented by letters (A-G), not included Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). Height: 70 mm. Object no. 19.
in the data base (app. 1) until more details are published. Place: Berkeley?
572. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 69 mm. E. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 36 mm. Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).
563. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 43 mm. Object no. 2. Object no. 6.
Object no. 5. Context: square 0/17, room 138 (Zorn 1993:1481, level 3). Context: square AB/16, room 622, level I (Zorn 1993:1590, 577. A body of type C.2 from Ramot (season 1992). Reg.
Context: square P/22, surface. Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.719. house 142.04). no. 2969.
Place: Berkeley? Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). Place: Berkeley? Context: locus 1152, domestic area.
Literature: cf. the note above. Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). Place: with the excavation team.
573. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 61 mm. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot.
564. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 38 mm. Object no. 1. F. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 96 mm
Object no. 22. Context: square 0/16, room 146, level I (Zorn 1993:1483, (?). Object no. 24. 578. A body of type C.2 from Ramot (season 1992). The
Context: square XJ22, surface. level 3). Context: square Z/17, room 661, level I (cf. Zorn 1993:1559, depression of the peg is clear at the upper end of the body.
Place: Berkeley? Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.689. house 125.03). There are remains of hands under the breasts. Reg. no.
Literature: cf. note before figurine no. 563 (above). Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). Place: Berkeley? 23710.
Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). Context: locus 243, a domestic area.
565. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 70 mm. 574. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 51 mm. Place: with the excavation team.
Object no. 62. Object no. 5. G. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot.
Context: square Z/13, surface, found while the area was re- Context: square XJ13, room 346, level I (Zorn 1993:1527,
filled after excavation. house 124.02).
Place: Berkeley. Place: Berkeley?
Literature: cf. note before figurine no. 563 (above). Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

566. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 69 mm.
Object no. 85.
Context: square Z/13, surface, found while the area was re-
filled after excavation.
Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. note before figurine no. 563 (above).
575. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 85 mm.
Object no. 35.
Context: square AB/24, room 390, level I (Zorn 1993:1538,
house 141.03).
Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.85.
Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

567. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 44 mm. 576. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 62 mm.
Object no. 90. Object no. 12a.
Context: square Z/13, surface, found while the area was re- Context: square AG/19, room 438, level 1- (Zorn 1993:1550,
filled after excavation. house 177.01).
Place: Berkeley? Place: Berkeley?
Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

568. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Object no. 12.
Context: square AG/17, surface debris, found while the area
was re-filled after excavation.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).
A. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 68 mm.
Object no. 12b.
Context: square AG/19, room 438, cf. no. 576 above.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

569. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 51 mm. B. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 53 mm.
Object no. 7. Object no. 48.
Context: square AJ/20, room 64 (Zorn 1993:1466, house Context: square AG/19, room 443, level I (Zorn 1993:1551,
177.05). house 177.01).
Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.311. Place: Berkeley.
Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). Literature: cf. note before no. 563'(above).

570. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 90 mm. C. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 50 mm.
Object no. 10. Object no. 56.
Context: square 0/17, room 136 (Zorn 1993:1481, house Context: square AF/20, room 445, level I (Zorn 1993:1552,
74.03). house 160.04).
Place: Berkeley, museum no. M.759. Place: Berkeley?
Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above). Literature: cf. note before no. 563 (above).

571. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 25 mm. D. A base of type C.3 from Tel en-Nasbeh. Height: 57 mm.
Object no. 2. Object no. 64.
Context: square 0/16, room 137 (Zorn 1993:1481, house Context: square AE/18, room 513, level I (Zorn 1993:1556,
74.02). house 159.06).

216 217

Addenda to Appendix 2
All the figurines below were added to the catalogue after
October 1994. They are not included in the data base (app.
1) or in the statistical analyses in the text of this work, except
the discussion of the distribution (in chapter IV). The reason
for this is that the distribution pattern forms a major part of
the work, and I wanted to have the maximal database for
discuusing it. In any case, the figurines in the addenda do
not change radically any of the conclusions reached in the
other chapters of the work (based on figurines nos. 1-578).
Many of the figurines in the addenda were found in the
excavations of Y. Shiloh in the city of David (Jerusalem),
included here by courtesy of the excavation team. These
figurines will be published soon (cf. Gilbert-Peretz 1989; in
press), thus I have shortened the description to the minimum
and have not discussed at all their stratigraphy and date
(many of these figurines were found in later fills or out of
context). I have given registration numbers to allow for the
identification of these figurines in the forthcoming report. A
few figurines in the addenda were found in earlier
excavations, but some of these were not published, and
others reached my knowledge only lately.
The method of presentation in the addenda is similar to that
of appendixes 1-2 (for the codes consult the introduction and
keys to appendix 2).
579. A body of type C.2 from Gibeon. It is covered with
white-wash and the remains of yellow paint. The hands are
placed below the breasts, not supporting them directly.
Holland defined this fragmnet as one of the hollow pillar-
figurines (his type B). However, the Gibeon report is silent
about this matter, and it seems that the photograph is
misleading. The report does not fail to mention exceptional
details in regard to other figurines, and it is unlikely that a
hollow body would not be mentioned. All the other JPF from
the Gibeon pool are solid.
Context: the public pool, discussed in the text of this work.
Literature: Gibeon WS: pI. 39:285; Holland 1975: B.7.2.
580. A moulded head of type B? from Tel el Areini (Erani).
Only a photograph was published. The head was probably
found in Yeivin's excavations. It is not well preserved.
Context and date: not published.
Literature: EAEHL New 11:420, upper row left.
581. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Lachish
(Ussishkin's excavations). It is covered with white-wash, and
has bands of dark red paint on the neck. The nose is
damaged. The size of the head and the rounded section of
the neck indicate that it is a JPF, and not a rider's head.
Reg. no. 31503/1.
Context and date: locus 4602. Level III, 8th century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
218 .
was found in this excavation, one of a few known from this Place: With the excavation team.
area (cf. Had. Arch. 53 [1975]:22). Reg. no. 188. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot.
Context: not published.
582. A body of type C.2 from er-Ras (near Jerusalem). The
Place: Romema, IAA no. 75-494. 598. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. Only one arm
base is damaged. The arms, left breast and neck are broken.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA. remained, placed closer to the abdomen than to the breast.
Height ca. 85 mm. Reg. no. 1234.
Reg. no. 11897/1.
Context: locus 109, probably an open court outside a
591. A body of type C.2 from Mt. Zion, Jerusalem Context and date: square Q/15, locus 1327. This is a
domestic building.
(excavation license 508 from 1975). The breasts and parts of building outside the main settlement area. Level VII, Iron
Place: with the excavation team.
the arms remained, but they are badly preserved. Reg. no. Age I (?).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of N. Feig.
138. Place: Romema?
Context: not published, cf. figurine no. 590 above. Literature: BS II: pI. 14:1, fig. 25:1.
583. A body of type C? from Vered Jericho.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 75-493.
Date: 7th century BC.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA. 599. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. The arms are
Place: with the excavation team.
broken, but the hands survived under the breasts. The
Note: for the site see Eitan 1984; 1994.
592. A moulded head of type B from Kh. el-Burg (Ramot, breasts form a continuos band without a separation. Reg.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. Eitan.
near Jerusalem). It was found in the 1970's by G. Edelstein, no. 12918/1.
and was mentioned as an "Astarte head" in a preliminary Context: square C/4, locus 1358, probably a destruction
584. A body of type C? from Vered Jericho.
report. layer in a room.
Date: 7th century BC.
Context: not published. Place: Tel Aviv.
Place: with the excavation team.
Place: Romema? Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
Note: for the site see Eitan 1984; 1994.
Literature: Courtesy of the IAA; Edelstein 1973:26. team.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. Eitan.
593. A moulded head of type B.4.A? from Moza (season
585. A moulded head of type B from Vered Jericho.
1993). It is not well preserved. Traces of red paint remained 600. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. The hands
Date: 7th century BC.
on the face. The peg of the head is visible in the section of survived under the breasts, but the arms are broken. The
Place: with the excavation team.
the neck. The side-locks are simple or worn. Height: 60 mm, breasts form a continuos band without a separation. A
Note: for the site see Eitan 1984; 1994.
face 26 mm. depression of a peg is visible at the upper end of the body.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. Eitan.
Context: area A, locus 163. Reg. no. 12118/1.
Place: with the excavation team. Reg. no. 10090. Context and date: square D/16, locus 1298. Level IV.
586. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Ramat Rahel.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. Place: Tel Aviv.
Height: 45 mm (face 27 mm). Reg. no. 1622/2.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
Context: not published.
594. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from team.
Place: at an exhibition in Daburiya, IAA no. 64-1155.
Moza (season 1993). The breasts and the left arm remained,
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA.
but the right arm is mostly missing. Height: 70 mm, face 20 601. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave.
mm. Reg. no. 10496. Reg. no. 16637/1.
587. A body of type C.2 from Ramat Rahel. The breasts and
Context: area A, locus 231. Context: square N/9, locus 2006. Level II.
parts of arms that support them survived. Height: 60 mm.
Place: with the excavation team. Place: Tel Aviv.
Reg. no. 1250/8.
Note: this head is reminiscent of head no. 118 from Ramat Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
Context: not published.
Rahel (above), but it is badly preserved. team.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-1159.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA.
602. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Tel Beer Sheba.
595. A body of type C.2 from Moza (season 1993). There are The upper half is missing and the classification is not
588. A body of type C.2 from Ramat Rahel. The arms are
traces of white-wash and red paint. It is very crude. The certain. There is probably a beginning of a 'pinched' nose.
missing and the breasts are almost completely broken. Reg.
breasts are separated and fallen. The hands descend along Reg. no. 12012/1.
no. 1270n.
the body, unlike the regular placement beneath the breasts. Context: locus 1279.
Context: not published.
The neck is long and thick. A peg of a moulded head is not Place: Tel Aviv.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-1156.
visible. Reg. no. 2014. Height: 85 mm. Note: in the object card, the fragment was defined once as a
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA.
Context: area B, locus 304. figurine and then as a chalcolithic goblet. The last is unlikely
, Place: with the excavation team. in view of the clay and the stratigraphy.
589. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from Mt. Zion,
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
Jerusalem (excavation license 238 from '1970, cf. Had. Arch.
team .
. 36:14; Had. Arch. 38 [1971]:15-16). Height: 30 mm. Reg. no.
596. A base of type C.3 from Moza (season 1993). It is
2535.
concave. Height: 76 mm. Reg. no. 10463. 603. A moulded head of type B.4.A? from Tel Beer Sheba. It
Context: not published.
Context: area A, locus 195. is rounded. The face is beautiful and well preserved. There
Place: Romema, IAA no. 76-1410.
Place: with the excavation team. are probably four rows of rounded (?) curls. The nose is a
Note: a card exists at Romema, but the current place of the
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of A. de-Groot. little damaged. The hair was painted black, the face dark red
figurine is not clear.
and the upper side of the head yellow. Reg. no. 4768/1.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the IAA.
597. A base of type C.3 from Moza (season 1993). It is Context: not published.
concave, made of orange ware and very badly preserved. Place: Tel Aviv.
590. A body of type C.2 from Mt. Zion, Jerusalem
Height: 76 mm. Reg. no. 6053. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
(excavation license 508 from 1975). An Iron Age burial cave
Context: area C, locus 608. team.
219
604. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. Part of the
right arm survived. There are marks of the left hand under
the left breast. Reg. no. 16107/1.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
605. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is broken at
all its length. Only one breast and marks of the hands
survived. There is a depression for a peg at the upper end of
the body. Reg. no. 3186/1.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
606. A body of type C.2 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is very thick
and rounded. The breaking marks of the arms are visible.
The breasts form one continuos band. Reg. no. 15431/1.
Context: locus 1208?, possibly a building from level II in
area E.
Note: this may have been a bird figurine, but less likely.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
607. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave.
Reg. no. 8436/1.
Context: locus 766, probably from level II.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
608. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave.
Reg. no. 8487/1.
Context: locus 770, probably from level II.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
609. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave.
Reg. no. 6452/9 (?).
Context: locus 665, probably from the north area (C), level II.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
610. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave.
The outside surface is blackened. Reg. no. 16423/1.
Context: locus 1843.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
611. A base of type C.3 from Tel Beer Sheba. It is concave
and probably has some remains of red paint. Reg. no.
14033/1.
Context: not clear.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
220
612. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from Malhata (season
1994). The preservation state is not good. It has three or four
rows of curls, now worn, and red slip. The side-locks have
two columns of 4-5 curls. Height of the face: 27 mm. Reg.
no. 1725.
Date: 7th century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of Y. Beit Arieh.
613. A base of type C.3 from Malhata (season 1994). It is
concave. There are some remains of white-wash and yellow-
brown paint. Height: 68 mm. Reg. no. 1735.
Date: 7th century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of Y. Beit Arieh.
614. A hand-made head of type A.1 from Tel Qasileh. Reg.
no. 1386.
Context: locus 138, "level VII". The stratigraphy is not clear.
Literature: Mazar, A. 1980: 113d, fig. 42d, pI. 39:5.
615. A moulded head of type B from the City of David
(Jerusalem). There are the remains of white-wash. The face
is completely missing, except parts of the side-locks. The
peg of the head is visible in the section of the neck. Height:
67 mm. Reg. no. D2/13667.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
616. A moulded head of type B.3-4 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1983. It is not well preserved, and the
shape of the hair is not clear. The nose is damaged. Height:
53 mm, face 24 mm. Reg. no. D1?/13590.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
617. A moulded head of type B.5.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1978 (?). There are the remains of
white-wash and red paint. The curls are rounded and small,
arranged in 5 rows above the forehead. The side-locks have
3-4 columns of 4-5 similar curls. Reg. no. G/2320.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
618. A moulded head of type B.3-4? from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1984. Th~re are the remains of white-
wash and red paint on the face. The head is not well
preserved and its lower part is broken. The side-locks have
3-4 curls (probably). Reg. no. E3/19035.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
619. A moulded head of type B.1-2.A? from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1984. Only the upper part of the head
remained, with one ridge of large curls (probably rounded)
and a smaller ridge above. Reg. no. D2/20049.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
620. A moulded head of type B from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1981. There are few remains of white-
wash. The head is broken and only part of the side-locks
remained, with 3-4 curls (now worn). Reg. no. E2I3065.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
621. A moulded head of type B.3 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1981. It is quite worn and the shape of
the curls is not clear. There are some remains of white-wash
and red paint. The side-locks have 3-4 curls. Reg. no.
E1/9329.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
622. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1979. It is rounded and has a few
remains of white-wash. Height 42 mm., head 23 mm. Reg.
no. E/1968.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
623. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1978. It is pointed and has a few
remains of white-wash and red paint. Height 53 mm., head
22 mm. Reg. no. E/2640.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
624. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1979. It is pointed and very worn.
Height 30 mm. Reg. no. E/1806.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
625. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1979. It is rounded and has some
remains of a red band of paint on the neck. There are no
clear depressions for the eyes. Height 35 mm., head 15 mm.
Reg. no. E/5839.
Note: the head is small and could have belonged to a horse
and rider figurine.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
626. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1979. The upper part is missing. Height
35 mm. Reg. no. E/1867 or E/1862.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
221
627. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. It has a few remains of White-
wash. Height 24 mm. Reg. no. G/11481.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
628. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed. Height 60 mm.,
head 32 mm. Reg. no. E3/13198.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
629. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed and very badly
preserved. Height 53 mm., head 30 mm. Reg. no. E1/14516.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
630. A hand-made head of type A. 1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed. Height 40 mm.,
head 28 mm. Reg. no. E1/10377.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
631. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is big, pointed and very badly
broken. Height 45 mm. Reg. no. D/13363.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
632. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is small and very badly
preserved. Height 53 mm., head 30 mm. Reg. no. E3/13198.
Note: this head could have belonged to a horse and rider
figurine.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
633. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed and badly preserved.
There are some traces of white-wash. The face is broken.
Reg. no. D2/14083.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
634. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1984. It is pointed and has some
remains of white-wash. Height 26 mm., head 23 mm. Reg.
no. E1/17265.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
635. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1984. It is pointed. Height 35 mm.,
head 21 mm. Reg. no. 02120243.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
636. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1984. It is small and pointed. The
section of the neck is thin and not rounded. Height 28 mm.,
head 25 mm. Reg. no. 02120283.
Note: this head may have belonged to a horse-and-rider
figurine.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
637. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1980. It is pointed and has a few
remains of white-wash. An incised line indicates a mouth, a
very rare feature among the JPF. Height 40 mm., head 30?
mm. Reg. no. E1/8651.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
638. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1980. It is pointed and has some
remains of white-wash. Height 50 rnm., head 25 mm. Reg.
no. E1/8521.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
629. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. It is pointed. Height 50 mm.,
head 21 mm. Reg. no. E3/13138.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
640. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1981. It is pointed. Height 22 mm.,
head 20 mm. Reg. no. E1/9524.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Note: the head is small and may have belonged to a horse-
and-rider figurine.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
641. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1980. It is rounded. Height 45 mm.,
head 20 mm. Reg. no. E1n930.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
642. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1981. It is very badly broken. Height 51
mm. Reg. no. E3/12809.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
222
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
643. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1983. It is pointed. Reg. no. E3/15643.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
644. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1983. It is pointed and has the remains
of white-wash. Reg. no. E3/15705.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
645. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1983 (?). The nose is peculiar, rounded
in shape. Reg. no. D2I13743.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
646. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A from
the City of David (Jerusalem). Season 1983. It is pointed
and has the remains of white-wash. Only the shoulder
survived from the whole body. Reg. no. E1/16680.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
647. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1983. Height: 30 mm., head 23 mm.
Reg. no. E3/15703.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
648. A hand-made head of type A.4 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1983. It has an applied hat. The back
side is damaged. Height: 60 mm., head 40 mm. Reg. no.
E3/15787.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
649. A hand-made head of type A.2 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1980. It has an applied turben', nearly
closed at the back side. There is a yellow band of paint on
the neck and red paint on the face, above the white-wash.
Height: 50 mm., head 28 mm. Reg. no- G/8227.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
650. A hand-made head of type A.2 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1981. It has an applied tureen'. placed
vertically on the head. There are traces of white-wash and
red paint. Height: 51 mm. Reg. no. G/11026.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
651. A hand-made head of type A.4 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1981. It has an applied hat, of which
only a small part survived. Height: 52 mm., head 34 mm.
Reg. no. E1/9582.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
652. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash and red paint
on the body. The breasts are small. Reg. no. E1/16107.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
653. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. The hands
meet under the breasts. Reg. no. E3/15634.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
654. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. The breasts are broken and the arms are
completely missing. Reg. no. E1/16360.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
655. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Only part of
the chest remained, without the hands. Reg. no. E1/16284.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
656. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. The hands
are placed beneath the breasts. Reg. no. E1/1459.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
657. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash and bands of
black paint. There is only one arm and small breasts. Reg.
no. E1?/12586.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
658. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. The breasts are broken. The base is concave.
Reg. no. E3/13192.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
659. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982.There are few traces of white-wash. The body
is broken lengthwise. Reg. no. G/11439.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
660. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are some traces of white-wash and
horizontal bands of dark brown paint on the arms. The
hands are placed under the breasts. Reg. no. E3/13016.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
223
661. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/11953.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
662. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are some traces of white-wash. There is
only one breast, and both arms are missing. Reg. no.
E1/10244.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
663. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reddish clay. There is only one hand left on
the body (the arms are both broken). Reg. no. E1/14538.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
664. A body of type C.2.D from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash
and a band of yellow paint above the breasts. The breasts
and the arms are usual, but a small disk is applied above the
chest, close to the body. Reg. no. E1/13037.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
665. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1984. There is a depression for a peg at the upper
end of the body. Reg. no. 02/20189.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
666. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. The body is
almost whole. The breasts are big. Height: 86 mm. Reg. no.
E2/2992.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
667. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. One arm is
missing and the other is placed under the breast. Reg. no.
E1/6143.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
668. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Both arms are
broken. The breasts are small. Reg. no. E1/8520.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
669. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. The hands
are placed under the breasts. The base is flattened. The
body is thin and not really rounded. Height: 65 mm. Reg. no.
E1/6217.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
 670. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Both arms are
broken. Reg. no. E3/17500. Height: 40 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
671. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. One arm is
broken. Reg. no. G/3016. Height: 58 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
672. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash and bands of
red and yellow paint above the breasts. The hands are
separated, placed almost at the sides of the body. Reg. no.
G/4331. Height: 73 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
673. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. One arm is
broken. Reg. no. 0/6665. Height: 63 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
674. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. The body is small and not well preserved.
There are a few traces of white-wash and red paint. Reg. no.
G/5797. Height: 42 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
675. A body of type C.1 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. The body is almost whole. There are traces of
white-wash. The hands do not join under the breasts. Reg.
no. E2/12015. Height: 81 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
676. A body of type C.1 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. The body is almost whole. There are traces of
white-wash and bands of red and yellow paint on the neck.
The hands join under the breasts. Reg. no. E1/9284. Height:
86mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
677. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash and red bands
of paint. Both arms are broken. Reg. no. E2I12015. Height:
75mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
678. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are very few traces of white-wash. The
breasts are small. Reg. no. E2I12812 (?). Height: 43 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
224
679. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1985. The body covered with white-wash. The arms
are broken and the breasts are damaged. Reg. no.
D2/21064. Height: 64 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
680. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. The hands
are placed under the breasts, but the arms are missing. The
depression of a peg is visible at the upper end of the body.
Reg. no. E/3566. Height: 43 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
681. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. One arm is
broken. Reg. no. E2/2777. Height: 52 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
682. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978 (?). There are a few traces of white-wash. Both
arms are broken. Reg. no. E/1895. Height: 54 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
683. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. The body is broken lengthwise and only one
arm and one breast remained. Reg. no. G/2868 (?). Height:
45mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
684. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Both arms are
broken and the breasts are damaged. Reg. no. E/5826.
Height: 40 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
685. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. The breasts
are small. The hands are placed beneath them, but the arms
are broken. Reg. no. E/1939.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
686. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash and red paint.
The arms are preserved, but the breasts are very damaged.
Reg. no. E/5502. Height: 44 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
687. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are some traces of white-wash. Only a
small part of the body survived, between the breasts and the
base. Reg. no. E1/10760.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
688. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Only a small
part of the body survived, between the breasts and the base.
Reg. no. E1/10205. Height: 52 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
689. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. Reg. no. E3/15430.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
690. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/15594.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
691. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
D2I13660.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
692. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/15606.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
693. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/1559.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
694. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/15841.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
695. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. Reg. no. E3/15850.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
696. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. It is made of well levigated, brown clay,
without traces of white-wash (unlike the typical JPF). Reg.
no. D2/13620.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
697. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/15444.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
698. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. Reg. no. E3/15655.
225
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
699. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/17504.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
700. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E1/16979.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
701. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/15684.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
702. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/13129.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
703. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/12962.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
704. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/15908.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
705. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12959.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
706. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12868.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
707. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12983.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
708. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/15430.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
709. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/13098.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
710. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E3113022.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
711. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/13147.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
712. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/13001.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
713. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Part of the lower body also survived. There
are traces of white-wash. Reg. no. G/11462.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
714. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12819?
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
715. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E3/13094.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
716. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of burning (?). Reg. no.
E3/12980.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
717. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E3/12895.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
718. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
D2I14111.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
719. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. D2/14144.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
720. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1982. Reg. no. E1/10630.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
226
721. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1984. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
D2I20352.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
722. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1984. Reg. no. E3/19072.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
723. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1984. Reg. no. E1/19602.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
724. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1984. Reg. no. E1/17323.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
725. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/11065.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
726. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/11173.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
727. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. Reg. no. E1/10023.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
728. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E117037.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
729. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/11115.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
730. A base of type C.3 from the City oJ David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E1/9071.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
731. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E1/8466.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
732. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E1/9942.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
733. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E1/9882.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
734. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. Reg. no. G/11105.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
735. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E2/12031.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
736. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. Reg. no. D/12621.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
737. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E1/6075.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
738. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/11249.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
739. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E1/10044.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
740. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E2I12133.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
741. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E117833.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
742. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. Reg. no. E1/9661.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
227
743. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/5791.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
744. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. Reg. no. E2I7268.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
745. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E1/9103.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
746. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. Reg. no. E1/9558.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
747. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/1969/1. Height: 40 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
748. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/1716. Height: 52 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
749. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979 (?). Reg. no. E1/1990. Height: 31 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
750. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E2/12031. Height: 31 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
751. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. Reg. no. E/593. Height: 45 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
752. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/3465. Height: 39 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
753. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. Reg. no. E/3320. Height: 50 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
754. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/3525. Height: 45 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
755. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/2636. Height: 30 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
756. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. Reg. no. E/3334. Height: 48 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
757. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/1925. Height: 50 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
758. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/1608/1. Height: 25 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
759. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/2781/1? Height: 42 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
760. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. Reg. no. E/4127. Height: 38 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
761. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/7613. Height: 32 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
762. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/14578. Height: 50 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
763. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/4630. Height: 42 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
764. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. Reg. no. G/2409. Height: 47 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
228
765. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/4130. Height: 55 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
766. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. Reg. no. E/1875. Height: 51 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
767. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E2I18067.8?
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
768. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/562.5.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
769. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. Reg. no. E1/9355.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
770. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1980. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/8216.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
771. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E2/12098.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
772. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1981. Reg. no. D/12436.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
773. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1985. Reg. no. D2I21019.
Context: locus 2765.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.'
Literature: courtesy of the excavationjeam.
774. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1985. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
02/20573.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
775. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1985. The shape of the base is awkward. Reg. no.
02120526.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
776. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/3893. Height: 85 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
777. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. Reg. no. E/3412. Height: 50 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
778. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/5861. Height: 35 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
779. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/4574. Height: 67 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
780. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. Reg. no. G/2254. Height: 61 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
781. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/3247. Height: 43 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
782. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
G/2089/2 (?). Height: 72 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
783. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/2476/1. Height: 26 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
784. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1979. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/1425 or E1925. Height: 36 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
785. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. Reg. no. E/1844. Height: 45 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
229
786. A base of type C.3 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1978. There are traces of white-wash. Reg. no.
E/3508. Height: 45 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
787. A body fragment of type C from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. Only a small part of the middle
body remained, between the base and the breasts. Reg. no.
E1/10969.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
788. A body fragment of type C from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. Only a small part of the middle
body remained, between the base and the breasts. There are
traces of white-wash. Reg. no. D2/14079.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
789. A body fragment of type C from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. Only a small part remained from
the middle body, between the base and the breasts. There
are few traces of white-wash. Reg. no. E/14700.
Place: Jerusalem, Terra Santa.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
Following is a list of a few other fragments from the City of
David excavations, that are too fragmentary for precise
classification. Since it is not clear if these are JPF, I have not
numbered them in the catalogue. They are all stored at the
Terra Santa bUilding, Jerusalem.
A-D. Solid hand-made heads. They could belong to animal
figurines. Reg. nos. G/2092 (season 1978); E/3646 (season
1978?); E/4118 (season 1979) and D2I20274 (season 1984).
E-G. Pillar bases, probably of type C.3., all from the 1983
season. Reg. nos. E3/15660; E1/16058; E3/15738.
H. A Fragment of a base, either of type C.3 or of a solid bird
figurine (the last seems more likely). Season 1982. Reg. no.
0/13318.
I-K. Pillar bases of type C.3 (?), from the 1978 season. Reg.
nos. E/4042, H/5240, E/3525.
L. A base of type C.3 (?), season 1978. Reg. no. E/1817.
M. A base oftype C.3 (?), season 1980. Reg. no. E1/8644.
790. A moulded head of type 8.2-4? from Ketef Hinom
(Jerusalem). Season 1994. The head is pointed and has a
few traces of white-wash. It is badly preserved, but has at
least two rows of curls above the forehead. The side-locks
are simple or worn. Height: 50 mm., face 25 mm. Reg. no.
3195.
Place: with the excavation team, temporarily at the Albright
Institute, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yetpublished, courtesy of G. Barkay.
791. A moulded head of type B.3-4. from Ketef Hinom
(Jerusalem). Season 1994. The head is rounded and
flattened at the back side. The face is well preserved. There
are 3-4 rows of curls above the forehead. The side-locks are
simple. Height: 64 mm., face 24 mm. Reg. no. 3314.
Place: with the excavation team, temporarily at the Albright
Institute, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.
792. A hand-made head of type C.2 from Ketef Hinom
(Jerusalem). Season 1980. It has an applied turban. Reg.
no. 974/1.
Context: tomb 34.
Literature: Barkay 1985:234, pI. 142:3.
793. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem).
Season 1988. It is badly preserved. Height: 40 mm. Reg. no.
1752.
Context: locus 144.
Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.
794. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem).
Season 1988. There are traces of white-wash. Height: 51
mm. Reg. no. 1537.
Context: locus 134.
Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.
795. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem).
Season 1994. Height: 48 mm. Reg. no. 3716.
Context: fills.
Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.
796. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem).
Season 1994. Height: 32 mm. Reg. no. 2858.
Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.
797. A base of type C.3 (?) from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem).
Season 1994. Pale brown ware. Height: 34 mm. Reg. no.
3348.
Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.
798. A base of type C.3 from Ketef Hinom (Jerusalem).
Season 1994. Reg. no. 3267.
Context: locus 423.
Place: cf. figurine no. 790 (above).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.
799. A hand-made head of type A.2? from the western slope
of the west hill, Jerusalem. The upper part is flattened. There
are protrusions at the sides, perhaps ears or a turban (?).
Height: 52 mm., face 21 mm.
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Barkay.
230
800-803. Four moulded heads of type B from the western
wall, Jerusalem (excavations of M. Broshi).
Literature: Barkay 1985: 208, list.
Note: Courtesy of G. Barkay.
804-806. Three hand-made heads of type A from the
western wall, Jerusalem (excavations of M. Broshi).
Literature: Barkay 1985: 208, list.
Note: Courtesy of G. Barkay.
807-834. Twenty eight body fragments of type C from the
western wall, Jerusalem (excavations of M. Broshi).
Literature: Barkay 1985: 208, list.
Note: Courtesy of G. Barkay.
835. A body of type B.2 from Jerusalem. The head, base
and arms are missing.
Context: it was found on the bedrock in the Muslim quarter.
Height: 85 mm.
Literature: Clermont Ganneau 1899 (rep. 1971): Vol. 1:82.
Note: I thank G. Barkay for this reference.
836. A moulded head of type B.3 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). It has three rows of curls above the forehead.
Height: 65 mm. Reg. No. D2I20269. IAA no. 86-1834.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
837. A moulded head of type B.1-2 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1984. Height: 70 mm. Reg. No.
D2/20256. IAA no. 86-1835.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
838. A moulded head of type B.5 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1979. There are five rows of curls
above the forehead. Height: 50 mm. Reg. No. G/3416. IAA
no. 86-1836.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
839. A moulded head of type B.1? from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1983. There is one row of curls above
the forehead. Height: 55 mm. Reg. No. E1/16756. IAA no.
86-1851.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
840. A moulded head of type B.3 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). There are traces of white-wash and red-brown
paint on the head, and white band on the neck. Height: 65
mm. Reg. No. E1/18456. IAA no. 86-1872.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
841. A moulded head of type B.3? from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1983. Height: 55 mm. Reg. No.
E3/15571. IAA no. 86-1901.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
842. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1984. Height: 45 mm. Reg. No.
D2I20242. IAA no. 86-1904.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
843. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1984. There are some traces of white-
wash. Height: 30 mm. Reg. No. D2I20339/2. IAA no. 86-
1882.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
844. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1978. The head is pointed and has
some traces of white-wash. Height: 48 mm. Reg. No.
E1/561. IAA no. 86-1854.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
845. A hand-made head of type A.1.A from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1982. The head is pointed. Height: 38
mm. Reg. No. E3/1311/5. IAA no. 86-1855.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
846. A hand-made head of type A.2? from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1981. The head does not have a real
turban, but a sort of an applied lump of clay whose nature is
not clear. Height: 50 mm. Reg. No. G/1147. IAA no. 86-
1837.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
847. A hand-made head of type A.2 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). It has a horizontal, applied turban shaped as a
closed ring. Height: 40 mm. Reg. No. G/7508. IAA no. 86-
1867.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
848. A hand-made head of type A.3 from the City of David
(Jerusalem). The upper part is pointed. According to the
231
Romema card, the head has two applied side-locks. Height:
30 mm. Reg. No. 5948. IAA no. 86-1881.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
849. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
There are traces of white-wash. The right arm is broken.
Height: 50 mm. Reg. No. 172/1? IAA no. 86-1838.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
850. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. The left arm is broken. Height: 60 mm. Reg.
No. E3/15592. IAA no. 86-1843.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
851. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
Season 1983. The arms are broken. Height: 80 mm. Reg.
No. E3/15578.
Place: Romema, in an exhibition. IAA no. 86-1866.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
852. A body of type C.2? from the City of David (Jerusalem).
There are white-wash and bands of red and yellow paint.
The hands are holding an object (?). Reg. No. D2I13658.
IAA no. 86-2030.
Context: locus 1882.
Place: Romema, in an exhibition.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
853. A body of type C.2 from the City of David (Jerusalem).
The left arm is broken. Height: 80 mm. Reg. No. E1/3526.
IAA no. 86-2031.
Place: Romema, in an exhibition.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.
854. A body of type C.2.D? from the City of David
(Jerusalem). Season 1983. The hands are holding an object,
perhaps a disk. Height: 80 mm. Reg. No. G/11152. IAA no.
86-2032.
Place: Romema, in an exhibition.
Literature: Courtesy of the excavation team.

Appendix 3: JPF from Unknown Origins
Following is a list of JPF from unknown origins, which is, no
doubt, a partial list. The origins of all, or most of these
figurines, are the antiquities markets, hence they were
obtained through robbery of sites. These figurines contribute
little to science, since their origin, date and context are
unknown." This is regrettable, as the percentage of whole
figurines is high: there are no less then 25 whole figurines
among the total 98 items in appendix 3 (almost equal to the
number of whole figurines among the 854 JPF of app. 2
above). A few of the figurines without origins might be
modern forgeries, but there is no doubt that many are
ancient.
Unlike finds from excavations, figurines from antiquities
markets can pass between different private collectors and
dealers, and sometime they appear in two publlcations
without cross references. I ave tried to identify such cases as
far as possible, and have centered mainly on collections of
institutions and museums: these would at least have a
sound registration system of their finds.
Figurines from unknown origins were often published in
various leaflets and auction catalogues. Other figurines are
as yet unpublished. I have given the shortest possible
description of each figurine, since the contribution to the
present work is limited. Needless to say, these figurines are
not included in the database (app. 1 above).
1. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A from the collection of A.
Reifenberg. The right hand is placed on the side of the
breast, and not underneath it. Height: 125 mm.
Place: Israel Museum, in exhibition. Museum no. 64-67/3
AR7.
Literature: Patai 1967:69, nos. 6-7.
2. A whole figurine of type Be. from the collection of M.
Dayan. The face is completely destroyed, hence an exact
classification is impossible.
Place: Israel Museum.
Literature: Ornan 1986:34.
3. A moulded head of type B.4.A? from the collection of M.
Dayan.
Place: Israel Museum.
Literature: Oman 1986:34.
4. A moulded head of type B.2-3? from the collection of M.
Dayan.
Place: Israel Museum.
Literature: Oman 1986:34.
5. A moulded head of type B.2-3A It is well preserved.
Place: Eretz-lsrael Museum, Tel Aviv. Museum no. 3345
(old), 169661 (new).
Literature: not yet published.
10ften the antiquties dealers suggest an origin, but one
cannot rely upon their information.
232
6. A whole figurine of type BC.2.B. The right hand is placed
on the side of the breasts, and not underneath it. Height: 190
mm.
Place: Eretz-Israel Museum, Tel Aviv. Museum no.
MHP.6789.
Literature: Deutsch 1989: 113 no. 323.
7. A whole figurine of type BcA. It was formerly in the
Y.M.CA exhibition, and its origin is said to be "Kh. Nebi
Lot". Height: 162 mm.
Place: Eretz-Israel Museum, Tel Aviv. Museum no.
MHP.144661.
Literature: not yet published.
8. A whole figurine of type Bc.2.B? Formerly from the
collection of Reifenberg. It seems to have one row of
rectangular curls and a second, higher row of square curls.
According to Reifenberg, it was found in a tomb near
Hebron. Height: 127 mm.
Place: Israel Museum. Museum no. AR8, 64-67/4.
Literature: Reifenberg 1925:43 fig. 1; Orlinsky 1954: 178
photograph.
9-12. Four whole figurines from the collection of Reifenberg.
They may be the same as figurines nos. 1, 8 above, but the
photographs are not similar. There is one figurine with a
hand-made head, holding a disk (no. 127). All the other have
moulded faces. In one case, the hands are placed above the
breasts (no. 128).
Literature: Reifenberg 1927:96, nos. 127-130.
13. A whole figurine of type AC.1A The hands are separated
under the breasts. Height: 120 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no. 585.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of O. Rimon, the
Hecht Museum.
14. A whole figurine of type Ac.1A The hands hold an
object. The right hand is reconstructed. Height: 123 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa, in the exhibition.
Museum no. 971.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
15. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1A
Height: 90 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no.
H.1516.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
16. A whole figurine of type Be.3.G. The lower body is
partially restored, with a sort of a ridge (the only comparison
to this is found in figurines from Nebo in Transjordan, cf.
app. 4.1.1-2). The origin is said to be "Idna near Hebron".
Height: 191 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no.
H.1514.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
17. A whole figurine of type Bc.2. There are no curls. Orange
ware, not typical of the JPF. Height: 141 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no.
H.1765.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
18. A whole figurine of type BC.2. the curls are worn. The
body and the head were mended, but perhaps composed
from more than one ancient figurine. The origin is said to be
Idna. Height: 152 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no.
H.1515.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
19. A whole figurine of type BC.3.A? The base and the right
arms are restored. The nose is damaged. Height: 150 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no.
H.42.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
20. A moulded head and upper body of type B+.3.B. It is
said to come from Zur Bahar (south of Jerusalem). It may be
the same figurine as no. 73 (below), but the photographs
were taken from different angels and do not permit exact
identification. Height: 93 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa.
Museum no. REH.144. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
21. A moulded head and upper body of type Be.2. The body
is hollow. There are no curls. The figurine is said to come
from Hebron. The head is very large and exceptional. Height:
110 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no.
HA04.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
22. A body of type C.1. It was mended with a head from
another figurine (now removed). The breasts are very large.
It may be a forgery. It is said to come from Hebron. Height:
168 mm.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. Museum no.
H.970.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
23-43. All the follOWing figurines are from the collections of
the Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. They are currently
not exhibited, but stored in the museum.
23. A moulded head of type B.3? Greenish, peculiar ware.
Museum no. H.723.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
24. A moulded head of type B.3A It is well preserved.
Museum no. H.202.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
25. A moulded head of type B.3-4? The face is very worn.
Museum no. H.885.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
233
26. A moulded head of type B.2A It is well preserved and
covered with white-wash. Museum no. H.814 or H.914 (?).
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
27. A whole figurine of type BC.2A It has the remains of
white-wash and yellow paint. The hands are placed above
the breasts. Museum no. H.1439.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
28. A moulded head of type B.2? It is somewhat damaged,
but looks authentic. The curls are worn. Museum no. H.715.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
30. A moulded head of type B.1?A The clay is crude,
brown, with remains of red paint. The head is pointed.
Museum no. H.716. Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
31. A moulded head of type B.2?A Museum no. H.200.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
32. A moulded head of type B.2.A? Soft brown ware.
Museum no. HE.089.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
33. A moulded head of type B.2. The clay is yellowish, unlike
other JPF. The back side is shaved with a tool. The facial
features are worn. Museum no. H.679.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
34. A hand-made head of type A.1A Museum no. EH.147.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
35. A hand-made head of type A.1A Unnumbered. It is
made of strange, orange ware, not typical of the JPF. The
nose is damaged.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
36. A "whole" figurine, built of two parts which probably
come from different figurines. The head is hand-made, very
long and peculiar. There are marks of ears and bands of
purple paint above white-wash. This head is exceptional and
perhaps not a JPF head.
Note: the body is registered separately as figurine no. 40
(below).
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
37. A body of type C.1. It is painted with pink paint (?).
Museum no. H.720.
Note: the authenticity of figurines nos. 37-39 is doubtful.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
38. A body of type C.1. Museum no. H.1764.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
39. A body of type C.1. Museum no. H.719.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
40. A body of type C.1. It is now mended to head no. 36
(above). There are traces of white-wash. Museum no.
REH.1415.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
41. A moulded head and upper body of type B+.4.A. There
are remains of white-wash, yellow paint on the body and red
on the face. Museum no. H.718.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
42. A moulded head of type B.4.A? The facial features are
worn. The moulding is very crude. The neck is cut by a
modern tool, and the white-wash looks as if it is "glued" to
the figurine. The firing looks 'too good'. Museum no. H.1900.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
43. A moulded head of type B.4.C. There are remains of
white-wash and red paint. The curls are wedge-shaped.
Museum no. H.717.
Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
44-60. All the following figurines are also from the collections
of the Hecht Museum, University of Haifa. When examined
they were not yet registered or exhibited in the Museum.
44. A moulded head of type B.2-3.A? It has painted bands
of yellow on the neck and red paint on the face.
Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
45. A moulded head of type B.3.A?
Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above) ..
46. A moulded head of type B.3? The curls are worn and the
head is pointed.
Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
47. A moulded head of type B.2-3. It is badly preserved.
Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
48-53. Bases of type C.3.
Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
54-59. Body parts of type C.2.
Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
60. A hand-made head of type A.1.A. It is pointed and has
the remains of white-wash and a yellow band of paint.
Place and Literature: cf. figurine no. 13 (above).
61. A whole figurine of type Be. It was formerly in the Dagon
collection, The head is broken and mended to the body, the
left arm is broken. The preservation state is bad.
Note: the Dagon collection formed the basis of the Hecht
Museum, thus this figurine may be one of the figurines from
Hecht Museum mentioned above.
Literature: Gonen 1979:58f, photograph p. 60.
62. A moulded head of type B.2-3. It has vertical curls.
Place: unknown. It was sold in 1989 and may be equal to
one of the heads from the museums.
Literature: Deutsch 1989: 114, no. 325.
63. A moulded head of type B.2. It has vertical curls.
Place: unknown; cf. figurine no. 62 above.
234
Literature: Deutsch 1989:114, no. 324.
64. A hand-made head and upper body of type A+.1.A.
Height: 120 mm.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1993:74, no. 260.
65. A whole figurine of type BC.2.A? The breasts are very
large. Height: 155 mm.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1990: no. 340.
66. A moulded head of type B.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1990: no. 341.
67. A moulded head oftype B.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1990: no. 342.
68. A moulded head of type BA.A.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1990: no. 343.
69. A moulded head of type B. the photograph does not
permit exact classification.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1989: no. 280.
70. A moulded head of type B. the photograph does not
permit exact classification.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1989: no. 279.
71. A whole figurine of type Be. The hair is very damaged.
Height: 145 mm.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1989: no. 278.
72. A whole figurine of type BC.3? Height 131 mm.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1989: no. 278.
73. A moulded head and upper body of type B+.2? Height:
95mm.
Place: unknown.
Note: this is probably the same figurine as no. 20 above.
Literature: Deutsch 1989b: no. 275.
74. A whole figurine of type AC.1A. There is an applied hat.
The breasts are very large and the hands do not meet
beneath them.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1989b: no. 274.
75. A moulded head of type B.2.A? The curls are large and
rounded. The peg is clearly seen at the lower end. Height: 72
mm.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1988: no. 355.
76. A moulded head of type B.3-4.A? The curls are small
and probably rounded. Height: 57 mm.
Place: unknown.
Literature: Deutsch 1988: no. 356.
77. A hand-made head of type A.1.A. There are remains of
white-wash and red and yellow painting on the neck. It was
bought in Jerusalem (said to originate in Tell Beit Mirsim).
Place: the prehistoric Museum, Munchen.
Notes: Jeremias reported 20 heads of female figurines,
mostly "bird shaped", but these were not published and their
whereabouts are unknown.
Literature: Jeremias 1993:43f, pI. 3b.
78. A moulded head of type B.1? It is very badly preserved.
The curls that survived are large and rounded.
Place: the Prehistoric Museum, Munchen.
Literature: Jeremias 1993:43f, pI. 4b.
Note: the figurine in pI. 4a (ibid) is a rider and not a JPF.
79. A whole figurine of type BcA. The breasts are very
large. Height: 165 mm. Museum no. 3845.
Place: The Museum of Ancient Art, Haifa.
Literature: Zemer 1991:25, no. 31.
80. A moulded head of type B.3-4. It is pointed and has the
peg beneath the neck. Reg. no. UT.5, Museum no.
EM.39731.
Place: Oslo, the Ethnographic Museum.
Literature: Supinska Lovset 1978:65-66.
81. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A. The hands do not join
under the breasts. The left breast is damaged. Reg. no.
UTA, Museum no. EM.39784a.
Place: Oslo, the Ethnographic Museum.
Literature: Supinska Lovset 1978:65-66.
82. A hand-made head of type A.3.A. It has an applied hat
and side-locks.
Place: London, the University collections.
Literature: Holland 1975: A.1.c.1 0, pI. 1:8.
83. A moulded head of type B.4.B. It is excellently preserved.
Reg. no. 5002? According to Patai, the head was found in
Lachish; but it is not similar to any head published from this
site. It is possible that it was given to the Museum by Colt,
the financier of the Lachish excavations (cf. app. 2: no. 74
above).
Place: Harvard, the Semitic Museum.
Literature: Patai 1967:68 photograph 5; Engle 1979: type 1:6.
84. A body of type C.1.D. It has a large disk, held close to
the body. It was bought in Jerusalem.
Place: The Prehistoric Museum, Munchen.
Literature: Jeremias 1993:44f,pl. 5b.
85. A whole figurine of type AC.1.A. There are remains of
white-wash. The head is pointed. There are three yellow
bands on the neck and one red band on the shoulder. The
235
figurine supposedly came from "Dura" (near Hebron).
Museum no. 546. Height: 125 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University.
Literature: not yet publisbed, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the
Institute of Archaeology.
86. A body of type C.2. There are remains of white-wash and
red and yellow bands of paint on the neck. Height: 110 mm.
Place: the figurine is currently found at the Rockefeller
Museum, and carries a museum no. P.53 (from the British
Mandate period). Hebrew University no. 547.
Note: though the origin is unknown, the fragment looks very
similar to a fragment from Tel ej-Judeideh (app. 2: no. 236),
and may be the same item.
Literature: not yet published (?), courtesy of G. Hurwitz and
the Institute of Archaeology.
87. A whole figurine of type Be.2.B. It is crudely made and
red-slipped. The body is hollow. The head has two rows of
square curls. The side-locks have three columns of 4-5
similar curls.
Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 4118. The
figurine was bought in 1944 and supposedly came from "the
area of Hebron" (negative no. 2352).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the
Institute of Archaeology.
88. A moulded head of type B.5. The side locks have 3-4
columns of 4 wedge-shaped curls. There are traces of red
paint.
Place: Hebrew University no. 551, now at Rockefeller? (cf.
note to figurine no. 86 above).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the
Institute of Archaeology.
89. A moulded head of type BA. The curls are small but very
worn. The head is damaged at its back side (now glued).
Height: 50 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 552.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the
Institute of Archaeology.
90. A moulded head of type BA. The side-locks have 2-3
columns of 4 wedge-shaped curls. Height: 56 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University No. 553 (negative
no. 8402).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the
Institute of Archaeology.
91. A moulded head of type B.1.C. Its design is special,
equal or very similar to a head from Jericho (cf. app. 2: no.
70). Height: 57 mm, face 35 mm.
Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 730. The head
was bought in 1940 (for the sum of 0.3 Palestinian
pounds ...). It was said to come from Dahariya.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the
Institute of Archaeology.
92. A moulded head of type B.1. The curls are huge and
square. There are traces of white-wash and yellow paint on

the neck. The side-locks have 2 columns of 2 curls each.
Height: 58 mm, face 24 mm (negative no. 8399).
Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 2132.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the
Institute of Archaeology.
93. A moulded head of type B.? It is small and lacks curls.
Place: Jerusalem, the Hebrew University. No. 2405
(negatove no. 3400).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of G. Hurwitz and the
Institute of Archaeology.
94-98. Five heads at the Rockefeller Museum. It is probable
that they were found in excavations made at the beginning of
the century, during the Ottoman rule, but their origin is not
registered. During the British Mandate period they were
registered at the Rockefeller museum (the P serial numbers).
Note: I have suggested to identify three other heads from
similar background with figurines found in early excavations
(see app. 2: no. 19 = P.411; no. 287 = P.1091; no. 569 =
pA06). For the current heads, the origins remain obscure.
236
94. A moulded head of type B.3-4. Height: 68 mm, face 21
mm.
Place: Rockefeller. Museum no. P.1095.
Literature: not yet publisned, but cf. note above.
95. A moulded head of type B.3-4.B. Height: 62 mm, face 23
mm.
Place: Rockefeller. Museum no. P.65.
Literature: not yet published, but cf. note above.
96. A moulded head of type B.4. Height: 47 mm, face 29
mm.
Place: Rockefeller. Museum no. P.407.
Literature: not yet published, cf. note above.
97. A moulded head of type B.4. Height: 68 mm, face 25
mm. Museum no. P.62. Place: Rockefeller. Literature: not
yet published, cf. note above.
98. A moulded head of type B.3-4. Height: 62 mm, face 27
mm.
Place: Rockefeller. Museum no. P.66.
Literature: not yet published, cf. note above.
Appendix 4: Transjordanian Figurines
The present appendix includes anthropomorphic figurines
from Iron Age Transjordan. The stress is put on female
figurines and heads which possibly belonged to female
figurines. The aim of the appendix is to form a body of
material for comparison with the JPF, rather than to create a
full, independent catalogue. With this aim in mind, I have
limited the description of each figurine to the bare minimum.
Many of the figurines from Transjordan cannot be dated
accurately, as the number of excavations and the available
historical sources are much fewer than for the land of Israel.
The chronology is, at present, dependent upon that of Israel,
and need not be discussed here further. 1 In many cases, the
contexts of the figurines are also obscure, and, similar to the
JPF, many fragments are badly preserved and too broken
for exact classifications.
I have included very few figurines from unknown origins in
this appendix. It is mainly in cases where whole figurines of
the discussed type were not found in scientific excavations,
or when a figurine from unknown origin has a special interest
(e.g., a peculiar design, or features which can be compared
with the JPF).
The references and the codes which are used in this
appendix are the same as those used in the former
appendixes. Square brackets ("[ ]") refer to drawings in
chapter III of this work.
4.1. Women Playing Drums with
Hollow, Wheel-made Bodies
4.1.1-2. Two whole figurines from Nebo. The wheel-made
body is hollow and has a ridge near the base (perhaps
indicating the edge of a dress). The drum is a disk of clay,
held perpendicular to the body. The heads are hollow. The
face is mould made and surrounded by two long side-locks
that reach the shoulders. The fingers of the hands are
shown.
Context: grave 84, Iron Age II with later finds.
Place: The Biblical Franciscan Museum, Jerusalem.
Museum nos. M.1072, M.2001.
Notes: Holland was already aware of the similarity with the
Phoenician figurines (cf. App. 5.V1.2 below). Amr ignored
these figurines in his thesis.
Literature: Saller 1965-6:260-262, fig. 28:1-2; Piccirillo
1983:56 left; Holland 1975:146f, B.V.b.2-3.
[Fig. 10:1-2].
4.1.3. A body fragment from Gebel Oal'a, Amman. The
broken part of the chest may indicate a drum (or only a
female breast). There is a painting in red and black. The hair
reachesthe shoulders.
Place: Amman, museum no. J.12327.
11 have dealt with this subject briefly elswhere (Oadmoniot
110 [1995], Hebrew).
237
Literature: Dornemann 1983: fig. 89:2; Amr 1980: no. 82.
4.1.4-5. Two body fragments from Amman. The hands and
part of the drums survived.
Context: tomb F.
Literature: Dornemann 1983:132f, fig. 87:6-7.
4.1.6. A hollow body fragment from Tell er-Rumeit. (Gile'ad
area). The hands hold a drum almost perpendicular to the
body.
Context: level 7.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 29, pI.4:4.
4.1.7. A hollow body fragment from Tell er-Rumeit. (Gile'ad
area). The right hand is placed on the drum, which is held
lower than usual.
Context: level 12.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 12.
4.1.8. A hollow pillar body from Tell el-Mazar. The hands
hold a drum perpendicular to the body; the left hand at its
bottom and the right hand against its center.
Context: H.3.6.
Place: University of Jordan, Irbid.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 30, pI. 5:1; Yassine 1988: pI. 13:4,
upper row left.2
4.11. Moulded Heads
4.11.1. A moulded head from Buseirah. The ears are not
depicted. The side-locks reach the shoulders.
Context: a waste dump, excavated only in a probe. 9th-8th
centuries BC?
Literature: Bennett 1972: pI. 44b; 1973: pI. 8a; Holland 1975:
A.Vl.a.1; Amr 1980: no. 69; Engle 1979: type VIII:104. For
the excavations cf. also Bennett 1966; 1983.
4.11.2. A moulded head from Kh. el-Balu'. The face is
elongated and crowned by large ears.
Context: surface find, the slope of the site.
Notes: the head was perhaps made in the same mould as
figurine 4.11.4 (below). Glueck claimed that it is a male
figurine (because of the elongated chin), perhaps the god
Kemosh, but also compared it to female figurines from Nebo
(4.1.1-2 above). Amr did not include this figurine in his work.
Engle missed it in Holland's thesis, presumably because he
did not check Holland's type B.
Literature: Glueck 1934:24, fig. 7 left; Glueck 1945: fig. 84
left; Grohman 1962:419 fig. 65:left; Holland 1975: S.v1.4;
Engle 1979: type VIII:110.
2For plaque figurines of playing women from Transjordan cf.
App.4.V.1, 5.V.1 below.

4.11.3. A moulded head from Dibon. The chin is elongated
and the ears are large. There are two (?) rows of curls above
the forehead, but the photograph is not good.
Context: room in area L.
Literature: Morton 1989:322 fig. 16.
4.11.4. A moulded head from Kh. el-Medeineh The chin is
very long. The head may have been made in the same
mould as figurine no. 2 (above).
Context: surface find.
Literature: Glueck 1934:24, fig. 7:right; Glueck 1945: fig.
84:right; Grohman 1962:419 fig. 65:right; Holland 1975:
B.VI.33; Engle 1979: type VIII:109.
[fig. 10:3].
4.11.5. A moulded head from Kh. el-Medeineh. There is an
incised line on the right chick and an object applied to the
back.
Place: Amman ACOR.
Note: it may be the same as no. 4 (above), but the
photographs look different.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 83.
4.11.6. A moulded head from Heshbon. It has an applied hat,
similar to hats of the rider figurines. Size: 37x61 mm.
Context: surface.
Place: St. Andrews 76.026.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 74; pI. 27:3a-b.
4.11.7. A moulded head from Heshbon. The facial features
are worn. Size: 30x40 mm.
Context: surface.
Place: St. Andrews 76.409.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 73; pI. 27:2.
4.11.8. A moulded head from Sahab. It is badly broken and
cannot be classified exactly.
Context: phase 15.3
Place: Amman.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 97.
4.11.9. A moulded head from Sahab. It has a peg and
incisions on the left chick.
Context: phase 1.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 77.
[Fig. 10:4].
4.11.10. A moulded head from Sahab. The hair reaches the
shoulders and is painted red-brown. This may also be a
head of a plaque figurine.
Context: not stratified.
Place: Amman, museum no. J.12958.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 80, pI. 14:2.
4.11.11. A moulded head from Sahab.
Context: phase 18.
Place: Amman.
3This is the terminology used by Amr, but the meaning of
"phase" is not clear. Amr does not give the full details, and
the excavations are not yet published.
238
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 55.
4.11.12. A moulded head from Gebel Joffa (Amman). It has
one row of curls, or perhaps a band for a veil (?) above the
forehead. There are curled side-locks as well.
Context: an Iron Age tomb with more than 150 vessels,
including bottles of the 6th century BC.
Place: Amman, museum no. J.11144.
Literature: Ma'ayah 1960: pI. 3:2; Holland 1975:48-50,
AIV.g.1; Amr 1980: no. 52.
4.11.13. A moulded head from the citadel of Amman. It is
very crude, with a peg and probably ears.
Context: phase 14.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Amr 1980:84, no. 78.
4.11.14. A moulded head from Amman. It is painted with
black and white.
Context: tomb F.
Place: not clear.
Literature: Dornemann 1983: fig. 87:4.
4.11.15. A moulded head from Amman. It is similar to figurine
no. 14 (above).
Context: tomb F.
Place: not clear.
Literature: Dornemann 1983: fig. 87:5.
4.11.16. A moulded head from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. It has a
necklace, made of horizontal lines. There are cross-marks
on the forehead and on the shoulder (Amr).
Context: square P/18, 979, level V.
Place: Amman, museum no. J.13022.
Literature: Pritchard 1985: fig. 10:31: Amr 1980: no. 62.
4.11.17. A moulded head from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. It bears a
cross on the neck (Amr).
Context: square P/14, 949, level III.
Place: Amman, museum no. J.13030.
Literature: Pritchard 1985: fig. 18:9; Amr 1980: no. 59.
4.11.18. A moulded head from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. It has a
rounded pendant on the forehead and horizontal lines above
it. There are also earrings (?); cf. figurine no. 24 below.
Context: a pit in area AA, level X, 10th-9th centuries BC.
Literature: Tubb 1988:37 fig. 12.
[Fig. 10:5].
4.11.19. A moulded head from Tel ers:Rumeit. The hair is
parted at the middle, then continues behind the ears until the
chin. Small clay lumps are applied to the chicks.
Context: phase 41.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Tubb 1988:37 fig. 12.
4.11.20. A moulded head from Tel er-Rumeit. It has a cross
shaped pendant on the neck; cf. figurines nos. 16, 17 and
perhaps 12 (above).
Context: phase 16.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 58, pI. 11:2.
4.111. Solid (1-12) and Hollow (13-17)
4.11.21. A moulded head from Tel el-Mazar. Pillar Bodies
Context: level 1.
Place: Irbid, University of Jordan Museum. 4.111.1. A solid body from Irbid. The hands are placed
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 56, pI. 10:3; Yassine 1988: pI. alongside the body.
13/3: lower row left. Context: a tomb, 13th-9th centuries BC.
Literature: Dajani 1966:pls. 34:29, 38; Holland 1975: AX.f.2.
4.11.22. A moulded head from Tel Deir-'Alla. It is painted
white and reddish-brown and has a peg. The eyes are very 4.111.2. A solid body from Buseirah. The hands hold the
large. There are two ridges above the forehead. The ears are breasts. The fingers are indicated.
probably represented, but the photograph is not very clear. Context: locus B.1I1.2.7.
Reg. no. DA2689. Place: the British Museum.
Context: locus B5.36, level VI? Literature: Amr 1980: no. 19.
Place: Amman, J.14023.
Literature: Van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:104, no. 126; 4.11I.3. A solid body from Buseirah. It is crude and the
Amr 1980: no. 76, pI. 14:1; EAEHL New 1:342. gesture of the hands is not clear.
Context: locus M.11.1.11.
4.11.23. A moulded head from Tel Deir-'Alla. It is very similar Place: ROM, Toronto.
to head no. 18 (above), and may have been made in the Literature: Holland 1975: AXVII. b.1, fig. 71:3; Amr 1980: no.
same mould. 105.
Context: locus DAD.205, sub phase L2.
Place: Amman, J.12678. 4.11I.4. A solid body from Kh. el-Medeineh. The breasts are
Literature: Franken, H.J. and C.A. 1963: pI. 15a:right; small. One hand is placed on the stomach.
Holland 1975: AXll.j.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:105; Amr Note: it may be a hollow body.
1980: no. 57. Context: surface.
Place: not specified.
Literature: Glueck 1934: fig. 12:right; Holland 1975: AX.48.
4.11.24. A moulded head from Tel Deir-'Alla. It is similar to
no. 23 above, but without a neck pendant. 4.11I.5. A solid body from Tawilan. It has an applied band.
Context: not yet published. Note: Amr classified this as a human form, but it is more
Note: It is missing from the catalogue of Amr. likely an animal figurine.
Literature: Franken, H.J. and C.A. 1963: pI. 15a:left; Holland Context: locus B.V.1.5.
1975: AVl.c.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:101. Place: Kerak (Moab).
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 27.
4.11.25. A moulded head from Tel Deir-'Alla. The face is very
flattened and peculiar, perhaps since the clay was not 4.11I.6. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. The hands are
pushed hard enough into the mould. The ears are probably placed beneath the breasts. Cream colored ware, black core.
not shown. Reg. no. DA3041. Context: DA.B.A.9.18.
Context: not yet published. Place: Amman, J.14020.
Literature: Van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:104, no. 127. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 22.
4.11.26. A moulded head from Jalul (Moab). It has two long, 4.11I.7. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. The hands are
thick side-locks, but is otherwise badly preserved. Size: placed beneath the breasts.
25x37 mm. Context: not stratified.
Context: surface. Place: Leiden.
Place: St. Andrews 76.415. Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:4, AX.c.1; Amr 1980: no. 20.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 75, pI. 27:4; Ibach 1978: pI. 18b: [Fig. 10:6].
right.
4.11I.8. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. The arms were
uplifted or extended to the sides.
Note: Weinberg (1978) published a cultic assemblage from Context: DAAR.102.
Edom (not found in a scientific excavation). It is now Place: Leiden.
exhibited in the museum of the University of Missouri, Note: according to Amr, the body is hollow.
Columbia. The photograph shows a head and an upper body Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 10:6, AXI.9; Amr 1980: no. 13.
of a female figurine, with moulded face and long side-locks.
It seems that it was only put inside the shrine-model for 4.111.9. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. The hands descend
demonstration, and not really found with the cultic and then bend forward (?). The breasts are small.
assemblage (since there is nothing about this figurine in the Context: DAC.136.
text, Weinberg 1978:30). Place: Leiden.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 9:5, AX.c.2; Amr 1980: no. 21.
239
4.11I.10. A solid body from Tell Deir 'Alia. It is unclear if there
are breasts. There is a band of black paint on the neck and
on the shoulder.
Context: area B, B.VI1.1.2.
Place: Manchester.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 71:1, addenda, A.XI.8.a.
4.111.11. A solid body from Kh. el-Balu'. The hands hold an
object.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Glueck 1934:27, fig. 12:left; Holland 1975:
AX.g.1.
4.11I.12. A solid body from Kh. el-Balu'. There are no breasts.
Context: ash fills of a kiln in area A1, Iron Age II period.
Literature: Worschech 1989:118, pI. 8:2.
4.11I.13. A hollow body from the citadel of Amman. The right
hand holds the breast, the left hand is placed on the
abdomen. The fingers are indicated.
Context: area A, square 4, locus 47 from level V (phase 1).
7th-6th centuries BC.
Literature: Zayadine 1973:32, pI. 20:1.
4.11I.14. A hollow body from Tell er-Rumeit. The right hand is
placed on the abdomen. The breasts are small.
Context: not stratified.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 15, pI. 4:2.
4.111.15. A hollow body from Tell el-Mazar. It is hand-made,
but only one shoulder and part of one arm remained.
Context: phase 21.
Place: Irbid, Jordan University.
Literature: Amr 1980:93 no. 99, pI. 17:1; Yassine 1988: pI.
13/4: upper row, center.
4.111.16. A hollow body from Tell el-Mazar. The hands hold
the breasts (?), which have little perforations.
Context: not stratified.
Place: Irbid, University of Jordan.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 14, pI. 4:1.
4.11I.17. A hollow body from Tell Deir 'Alia. Part of the peg of
the head is still attached to the body. The hands hold
something (a dove or a drum?). Reg. no. DA2791.
Literature: Van der-Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:104f, no. 129.
4.IV. Male Figurines
4.1V.1. The so-called ''traveler'' from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. The
body is hollow. The head is hand-made. There is a sort of a
bag on the back, and the figure is wearing a long dress.
Pritchard (1968) gave a full description of this figurine.
Context: level III.
Place: Amman J.13013.
Literature: Pritchard 1968:26-29; Amr 1980:37-39, no. 1.
4.1V.2. A moulded head from Beit Saida (on the north-
eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee). It has a high "atef'
240
headdress, perhaps indicating that it is a god (it is not
certain). It is similar to heads no. 4.IV.4, 4.IV.7 (below).
Context: area A, Iron Age II (a temple?).
Literature: Arav 1994:22 (Hebrew); Arav 1992:252ff, fig. 2;
Daviau and Dion 1994:162, table 1:14.
[Fig. 10:7].
4.1V.3. A moulded head from Kh. el-Medeineh. It has a very
long chin (a male beard?). The right chick is scratched (cf.
figurine 4.11.5 above). The side-locks reach the shoulders.
There is a veil, or triangular curls (?) behind the side-locks.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Glueck 1933:11f, fig. 1; Glueck 1934:23, fig. 6a;
Grohman 1962:418, fig. 62; Holland 1975: B.VI.32; Engle
1979: type VIII:108.
4.1V.4. A moulded head from Tell Jawa (near Tell el-Umeiri).
It has a high "atef' headdress, cf. figurine 4.IV.2 above.
Similar crowns appear on the heads of Ammonite limestone
statues (representing kings or gods?). Daviau and Dion
(1994) identify the figure as the god EI.
Context: a large building from phase 6.
Literature: Herr 1991:170f, pI. 2:2; Daviau and Dion 1994.
4.1V.5. A moulded head and upper body from Tell el-Mazar.
The body is solid. There is a hand-made "hat" and an object
on the back (quilt?). The ears are indicated. Height: 96 mm.
Context: phase 2.2. Exact details were not published.
Note: it may be the figurine of a rider.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 7, pI. 2:2a-b; Yassine 1988: pI.
13/4: upper row, left.
4.1V.6. A nearly whole figurine from Tell Deir-Alla. The head
is pointed and has disk-shaped eyes. The ears are
represented. There are remains of something applied to the
back. The hands are extended forward. Reg. no. DA2560.
Context: AD/DI7I12, level IV, possibly 7th century BC.
Note: it may be a figurine of a rider.
Place: Amman J.13736, now exhibited at Tell Deir 'Alia.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 5; Franken and Ibrahim 1978:71,
pI. 39:1; Zayadine 1987: no. 158.
4.1V.7. A fragment of a male figurine from the citadel of
Amman. It has a pointed "atef' crown, a beard and a
mustache painted with black; cf. figurines nos. 2, 4 (above).
Context: a floor of an Iron Age II room.
Literature: Zayadine et. al. 1988:362; Daviau and Dion
1994:116, table 1:15.
4.V. Hand-made Figurines
4.V.1. A whole figurine from Ein Genin, near Buseirah. The
head and the body are hollow. The figure probably holds a
drum. The facial features are crude and resemble some
heads from Philistia.
Context: found by locals.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Harding 1937: pis. 9:4; 10:5; Glueck 1945:151-
153, fig. 80; Holland 1975: B.II.b.1; Amr 1980: no. 32a.
[Fig. 10:8].
4.V.2. A head from Buseirah. The eyes are made of applied
disks and there is an applied band on the forehead.
Note: according to Amr, the head is hollow, but perhaps he
means the body (?). He thinks that they are male figurines.
Context: not published.
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 4:5, AI.i.14; Amr 1980: no. 2.
[Fig. 10:9].
4.V.3. A head from Buseirah. It is similar to figurine 2 above,
but has the representations of ears.
Context: B1.1.3, waste debris?
Literature: Holland 1975: fig. 4:5, AXVll.a.1; Bennett 1972:
no. 3, pI. 44b; Amr 1980: no. 8.
4.V.4. A head an upper body from Dibon. It is very crude.
The pupils are marked by incisions. Little 'stump' hands.
Context: an area of a Nabatean cemetery. Tushingham
suggested that it came from an Iron Age tomb.
Literature: Holland 1975: AI.L.2; Tushingham 1972: fig.
28:45, pI. 23:10.
4.V.5. A head from Kerak (Moab). It has an applied
hairdress and incised details.
Context: from an antiquity market.
Place: Amman J.8995.
Literature: Holland 1975: Al.j.6, pI. 2:2.
4.V.6. A head from Tell es-Saidiyeh. It has 'coffee bean' eyes
and an incised mouth. It is pointed at the top. Reg. no.
S.944.
Context: silo 85 from level 4.
Place: Amman, J.13024.
Literature: Pritchard 1965:26-33; Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:3;
Amr 1980: no. 6.
4.V.7. A hollow head from Tell er-Rumeit. It is flattened from
above, with representation of ears and a headband.
Context: phase 26.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 4, pI. 1:2.
4.V.8. A nearly whole figurine from Tell el-Umeiri. It probably
represents a sitting woman, holding something close to the
chest (the text mentions a child).
Context: A7.K.41. Reg. no. 342.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Platt 1989:355, fig. 20:5.
4.V.9. A head and upper body part from Tell Deir-Alla. The
eyes are hand-made, but other facial features are incised.
The hands are outstretched to the sides or forward.
Context: sub phase K9, DAID/224.
Place: Leiden.
Note: it maya figurine of a rider.
Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.j.4, fig. 5:6; Amr 1980: no. 48.
4.V.10. A head with a peg from Tell Deir-Alla. The chin is
pointed and there is a row of indentations on the forehead.
Reg. no. 2742.
Context: A7.8, a refuse pit from level III (Persian period?).
Literature: Ibrahim and Van der-Kooij 1983: fig. 1:1; Van der-
Kooij and Ibrahim 1989: no. 159.
241
4.V.11. A head from Tell Deir-Alla. There is one row of large,
rounded curls. The eyes are made of applied disks, and
there is no representation of ears.
Context: DAC.302.
Place: Leiden.
Note: it maya head of a plaque figurine.
Literature: Franken 1960: pI. 14a; Holland 1975: AI. i.15, fig.
5:6; Amr 1980: no. 84.
4.V.12. A hand-made head from Tell Deir-Alla. The eyes are
incised.
Context: not published.
Place: Leiden.
Literature: Holland 1975:183, Al.j.3, fig. 5:5.
4.V.13. A head from Tell Deir-Alla. The eyes and the mouth
are incised. There is a tall hat (not applied).
Context: DAAA.300.
Place: Leiden.
Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.j.2, fig. 5:4; Amr 1980: no. 38.
4.V.14. A head from Tell Deir-Alla. It is similar to no. 13
(above), but with applied disks.
Context: not stratified.
Place: Leiden.
Literature: Holland 1975: AI.j.1, fig. 5:3; Amr 1980: no. 39.
4.V.15. A whole figurine from Amman. It is hermaphrodite: a
female body, pregnant, with a male sexual organ. The hands
are placed on the abdomen. The breasts are small. There is
a beard and a mustache, painted blac~. A crown of volutes
towers above the head.
Context: tomb "C".
Place: Amman?
Literature: Harding 1951:37, pI. 14; Dornemann 1983:144-
145; Homes-Frederiqc 1987:93, photograph 4; Amr 1980:
no. 23a, pI. 4:3.
4.VI. Hand-made Body Parts (not
Pillar Bodies)
4.VI.1. A solid body from Buseirah. The hands were probably
outstretched forward, but there is no indication of breasts.
Holland classified the figure as a sitting one.
Context: B.VI.4.2.
Place: Oxford.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.c.2, fig. 71:2; Amr 1980: no.
107.
4.VI.2. A solid body from Tell Deir Alia. There are legs and
an applied indication of a female sexual organ.
Context: DAA220.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Franken 1963: pI. 14b:right; Holland 1975: vol.
1:183, AXlIl.b.5, fig. 14:5; Amr 1980: no. 46.
4.VI.3. A solid body from Tell Deir Alia. There are legs and
the body is similar to no. 2 (above), but incised marks
appear on its neck, abdomen and pubic area.
Context: DAA119. 4.VJ.14. An arm from Tell Deir Alia. It was probably part of a Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.a.4, pI. 19:4. Context: not published.
Place: Amman, J.12653. large statue (cf. the figures from Qitmit and En Hazevah, Place: Kerak.
Literature: Franken 1963: pI. 14b:left; Holland 1975: Beck 1995; Cohen and YisraeI1995). 4.VII.6. A head from Tell Deir Alia. Reg. no. DAlD.241. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 71.
AXlIl.a.1, fig. 14:1; Amr 1980: no. 10. Place: Amman, J.12692. Context: sub phase K.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.a.1, fig. 15:2; Amr 1980: no. Place: Amman, J.12719. 4.VIII.3. A head and upper body from Buseirah.
4.VJ.4. A solid body from Tell Deir Alia. It has twisted legs. 110. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.6, fig. 20:4; Amr 1980: no. Context: B.VII.1.2.
The pubic area and a band on the abdomen are marked by 61. Place: Toronto.
indentations. 4.VJ.15. An arm from Tell Deir Alia. It was probably part of a Literature: Holland 1975: C.II. b.4b, addenda, fig. 71:5; Amr
Context: DAAA.304. large statue (cf. no. 14 above). 4.VII.7. A head from Tell Deir Alia. Height 62 mm. 1980: no. 72.
Place: Leiden. Place: Leiden? Context: not stratified.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.a.2, fig. 14:2; Amr 1980: no. Literature: Holland 1975: AXVI.a2, fig. 15:3; Amr 1980: no. Place: Leiden. 4.VIII.4. A middle body part from Buseirah. There are
37. 110. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.7, fig. 20:5; Amr 1980: no. remains of red slip.
54. Context: B.VII.1.2.
Place: Dublin, Trinity college.
4.VJ.5. A solid body from Tell Deir Alia. There are legs, and
4.VII.8. A head from Tell Deir Alia. Reg. no. DA1073. Literature: Holland 1975: C.II.b.4c, addenda, fig. 71:6; Amr
the body was perhaps applied to a vessel. 4.VII. Plaque Figurines Context: surface find. 1980: no. 17.
Context: DAD.415.
Place: Amman, J.9747.
Place: Amman, J.9748. General notes: for plaque figurines of drum playing women
Literature: Holland 1975: C.IXc.3, pI. 11:1; Van der Kooij 4.VIII.5. A nearly whole body from Buseirah.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.b.6, fig. 14:6; Amr 1980: no. see App. 5.V.1 (below). Most of the figurines of type 4.VII
and Ibrahim 1989:104, no. 124. Context: B.II.7.4.
9. have representations of ears and their side-locks reach the
Place: Kerak.
shoulders.
4.VII.9. A head from Tell Deir Alia. Reg. no. DA3040. It was Literature: Holland 1975: C.II.b.4a, addenda, fig. 71:4; Amr
4.VI.6. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia.
made in the same mould as head no. 8 (above). 1980: no. 25.
Context: surface find. 4.VII.1. A nearly whole figurine from Na'ur (?). There is a
Context: 7th-6th centuries BC.
Place: Leiden. narrow ledge of clay around the figure. The left hand is
Place: Amman J.9747. 4.VIII.6. A middle body part from Buseirah. There are
Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.4. placed on the breast, the right one on the side of the body.
Literature: Van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:104, no. 125. remains of red paint.
Context: not stratified.
Context: B.VII.4.7.
4.VJ.7. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Place: Amman J.6053.
4.VII.10. A head and an upper body part from Tell es- Place: Kerak.
Context: surface find. Literature: Holland 1975: C.l.b.4, pI. 9:2.
Saidiyeh. It is similar to figurine no. 3 (above). Reg. no. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 18.
Place: Leiden. S.773.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.3; Amr 1980: no. 51. 4.VII.2. A nearly whole figurine from Amman (found in
Context: surface find. 4.VIII.7. A nearly whole body from Buseirah.
1943). There is a narrow ledge of clay around the figure. The
Place: Amman, J.13020. Context: B.VI.3.4.
4.VJ.8. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. left hand is placed on the breast, the right one along the
Literature: Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:5; Amr 1980: no. 40. Place: The British Museum.
Context: surface find. body.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.ll.b.4d, addenda, fig. 71:7; Amr
Place: Leiden. Context: not stratified.
4.VII.11. A head of an unknown origin. It is not clear whether 1980: no. 26.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.2; Amr 1980: no. 113? Place: Amman J.4973.
it belonged to a plaque-figurine or to a pillar-figurine.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.Vl.c.1, pI. 10:8.
Place: Amman, J.11146. 4.VIII.8. A body part with legs from Tell Deir Alia. There is no
4.VJ.9. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 60, pI. 12:2 indication of the sex. The protrusions at the sides of the body
Context: K.204. 4.VII.3. A head and upper body part Tell al Mazar. The
suggest that the hands were placed along the body.
Place: Amman, J.13107. hands are placed on the chest. There are remains of black
Context: DAD.135.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.1; Amr 1980: no. 112. paint on the right shoulder.
Context: surface find. 4.VIII. Plaque Figurines of Pregnant Place: Leiden.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.XI.e.1, fig. 20: 8; Amr 1980: no.
4.VJ.10. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. Place: University of Jordan Museum. Women in Deep Moulding 93.
Context: surface find. Note: the figure is probably holding a disk (cf. type 5.V.1
Place: Leiden. below), if it is the same as Yassine 1988: pI. 13/4: upper General notes: Most of these figurines were found in
Literature: Holland 1975: AXVl.b.5; Amr 1980: no. 114. row, center. Buseirah. They depict a naked, pregnant woman with an 4.VIII.9. A middle body part from Buseirah. There are
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 85, pI. 15:3. indication of the pubic area. The hands hold the breasts remains of the lower side-locks above the chest. The hands
4.VJ.11. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. (with a separation of the thumb from the other fingers). Most hold the breasts. There are some remains of slip.
Place: Amman. 4.VII.4. A head and upper body part from Tell Deir Alia. of these figurines have a square hairdress, reaching the Context: B.1.2.2, debris without a clear dating.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 111. There is a wide ledge of clay around the figure. The hands shoulders below. The ears are not marked. Nos. 10-15 are Place: Oxford.
are placed beside the body. The figurine is very crude, and heads, which may have belonged to different types of Literature: Bennett 1972:430, pI. 44b; Bennett 1973: pI. 8a:
4.VJ.12. A solid leg from Tell Deir Alia. lacks ears. Reg. no. BB.211. bodies. No. 16 is exceptional. upper right; Holland 1975: C.II.b.4, fig. 19:2, pI. 9:3; Amr
Context: not published. Context: surface find. 1980: no. 36.
Place: Amman, J.13756. Place: Leiden. 4.VIII.1. A nearly whole figurine from Buseirah. There are
Note: it may have been a leg of an animal figurine. Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.a.5, pI. 19:5; Amr 1980: no. remains of black paint. 4.VIII.10. A head from Buseirah.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 108. 64. Context: B.11.7.4. Context: B.VI.10.2.
Place: Kerak. Place: Toronto, ROM.
4.VJ.13. A solid leg (?) from Tell Deir Alia. It may have been 4.VII.5. A head from Tell Deir Alia. It is similar to no. 4 Literature: Holland 1975: C.ll.b.4e, addenda, fig. 72:1; Amr Literature: Amr 1980: no. 66.
a head of an animal figurine. (above), but it is hard to see the details. 1980: no. 23.
Place: Leiden. Place: Leiden. [Fig. 10:10]. 4.VIII.11. A head from Buseirah.
Literature: Holland 1975: P.1I1.3, fig. 69:3; Amr 1980: no. 50. Note: I could not find this head in Amr (1980) thesis. Context: B.VI.2.5.
4.VIII.2. A head and upper body from Buseirah. There are Place: St. Andrews.
remains of burning and encrustation of lime.

242 243
Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.5c, addenda, fig. 72:4; Amr Place: Amman, J.13786. 4.X.8. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. It may have remained.
1980: no. 53. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 47. belonged to type 4.VIIi. The pubic area is represented and Context: DAEE.400.
the belly is protruding. Place: Leiden.
4.VIII.12. A head from Buseirah. 4.1X.4. A whole figurine from Pella. It depicts a dressed Context: not published. Literature: Holland 1975: C.XlIl.a.3, fig. 20:9; Amr 1980: no.
Context: B.1I1.2.12. woman holding a child. The child's sucks from her breast. Place: Leiden. 100.
Place: Emory. The woman has long side-locks of hair. Note: according to Amr it is in Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.5, fig. 20:3; Amr 1980: no. Context: phase BI, locus XXXII A 7. 13, 9th century BC (?). Literature: Holland 1975: C.Xl.d.2, fig. 20:6; Amr 1980: no.
67. Literature: Potts 1988:141f, pl. 22:3. 89?

4.VIII.13. A head from Buseirah. 4.X.9. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. The pubic area is 4.XI. Addenda
Context: B.1I1.2.6. represented and there are rings on the ankles.
Place: Manchester. Context: DAB.218, sub phase 1. 4.XI.1. A head from Jalul. Only a photograph was published.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.3, fig. 20:1; Amr 1980: no. 4.X. Leg Fragments of Plaque Place: Leiden. It may be a figurine already mentioned by Amr (but it is not
Literature: Holland 1975: C.XIII. a.5, fig. 20: 11; Amr 1980: 4.11.26 above).
63. Figurines no. 91. Literature: Ibach 1978: pI. 18b:left.
4.VIII.14. A head from Buseirah. 4.X.1. Leg fragment from Buseirah. Probably of type 4.VIII.
Context: B.1I1.2.12. 4.X.10. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. There pubic area is 4.X.2-7. A group of figurines from Tell el-Mazar. They belong
The pubic area is represented.
Place: Emory. represented and there are rings on the ankles. to various types, but the photograph does not allow clear
Context: B.11.5.6.
Note: I could not locate it in the Amr's thesis. It is not Context: DAAA.118. classification, and it is best to wait for further publication.
Place: British Museum.
identical to head no. 12 above. Place: Leiden. Literature: Yassine 1988: pI. 13/1, upper row: center and
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 43.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.4, fig. 20:2. Literature: Holland 1975: C.XlIl.a.6, fig. 20:12; Amr 1980: right; lower row: left and right; pI. 13/3, upper row:left; pI.
no. 92. 1314: lower row:left.
4.X.2. Leg fragment from Buseirah. Probably of type 4.VIII.
4.VIII.15. A head from Buseirah. It is exceptional - rounded The pubic area is represented.
and not square. It may have been part of a different type of Context: B.11.5.6. 4.X.11. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. There are rings on
figurine. the ankles. 4.XI.8. A body from Tell es-Saidiyeh. It is female, with
Place: Toronto.
Context: AI.10.1. Context: surface find. incised pubic hair, incised decoration on the hips and a side-
Literature: Holland 1975: C.XlIl.a.2e, fig. 72:5; Amr 1980:
Place: Manchester. Place: Leiden. lock or pendant on the neck (an edge of it remained on the
no. 96.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.5b, addenda, fig. 72:3; Amr Literature: Holland 1975: C.xlll.a.4, fig. 20:10; Amr 1980: body).
1980: no. 68. no. 94. Context: probe area 1, phase 1.
4.X.3. Leg fragment from Sahab. The fingers of the feet are
Place: Amman.
incised.
4.X.12. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. Only the feet Literature: Amr 1980: no. 45.
4.VIII.16. A head from Buseirah. According to the drawing, it Context: level 4.
looks like a head of a pillar figurine, with a peg, short side- Place: Amman.
locks and large ears. Still, I followed Holland's classification, Literature: Amr 1980: no. 49, pI. 10:1.
since he probably saw the figurine itself.
Context: B.II. 4.X.4. Leg fragment from the citadel of Amman. The pubic
Place: Oxford. area is represented.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.IX.g.5a, addenda, fig. 72:2; Amr Context: SD.35, Iron Age I period?
1980: no. 65. Place: Amman.
Literature: Zayadine 1973:32, pI. 20:2; Holland 1975:
OXl.d.}, fig. 72:5; Amr 1980: no. 44, pI. 9:2.
4.IX. Unique Plaque Figurines
4.X.5. Leg fragment from Tell el-Mazar.
4.1X.1. A middle body part from Tell Deir Alia. It depicts a Context: phase 3.
woman holding a child. The child's hands are place on the Place: University of Jordan.
woman's breasts. Literature: Amr 1980: no. 95; Yassine 1988: pI. 13/3: upper
Context: not published. row, 3rd from the left.
Literature: Franken 1960: pI. 13b; Franken H.J. and CA
1963: pI. 17b; Holland 1975: C.xIV.b.1, fig. 20:14; Beck 4.X.6. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. The pubic area is
1991: fig. 11:right. represented and there are bracelets on the arms.
Context: DAGG.204.
4.IX.2. A hand-made (?) body part from Tell Deir Alia. It Place: Leiden.
depicts a dressed woman, probably pregnant. The hands lie Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.b2, fig. 19:6; Amr 1980: no.
beside the body and carry bracelets. Reg. no. DA2585. 42.
Context: DAD.C.7.8.
Place: Amman, J.13755. 4.X.7. Leg fragment from Tell Deir Alia. It may have
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 41; Van der-Kooij and Ibrahim belonged to type 4.VIII. The pubic area is represented.
1989: no. 152. Context: surface find.
Place: Leiden.
4.1X.3. A body part from Tell es-Saidiyeh. It probably depicts Literature: Holland 1975: C.Xl.d.3, fig. 20:7; Amr 1980: no.
a woman holding a child. The pubic hair is marked. 90.
Context: not stratified.

244 245

Appendix 5: Other Figurines
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
5.1. Other Anthropomorphic team.
Figurines from Judah
5.1.2.7. Hollow body from the City of David, Jerusalem
(season 1983). Creamy ware, covered with white-wash. only
one breast and one arm remained. The body is wheel-made
5.1.1: Figurines with moulded Face and (?). There is a band of red paint on the chest. Reg. no.
Hollow, Wheel-made Body (type Be) E3/15924.
Place: Terra santa, Jerusalem.
These figurines are included in App. 1-2: nos. 78, 183 [cf. Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
fig. 4:5). For other figurines of this type, from unknown team.
origins, see App. 3: nos. 16, 87.
5.1.2.8. Hollow body from the City of David, Jerusalem
(season 1982). There are remains of white-wash and a red
5.1.2: Hollow Body Parts band of paint on the neck. The hands are placed under the
breasts. The body is probably wheel-made. Part of the peg
5.1.2.1. An upper body part from Jerusalem. The hands are of the head is visible inside the hollow body. Height: 80 mm.
placed under the breasts (the right arm is broken). Reg. no. E1/10126.
Context: unknown. Place: Terra santa, Jerusalem.
Literature: Vincent 1911: pI. 16:1; Pilz 1924: Allla.37; Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
Holland 1975: B.VII.11? team.
5.1.2.2. An upper body part from Jerusalem. There are
remains of white-wash. The hands are placed beneath the 5.1.3: Female Drum Players
breasts (the right arm is broken). Reg. no. 3341.
Context: locus A840.14a. These figurines are already included in App. 1-2: nos. 45,
Place: Dublin, museum no. WM.655. 118,359 (above). Body fragments which probably belong to
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII.7, fig. 17:5. the same type are App. 1-2: nos. 179, 360, 361; perhaps
also 280, 312, 424 [fig. 4:3-4). Add one figurine from the City
5.1.2.3. A hollow body from Jerusalem. The hands were of David, App. 2: nos. 664.
placed beneath the breasts (now both broken). Reg. no.
C.775.
Context: cave 1. 5.1.4: Miscellaneous Heads (nos. 1-12 are
Place: Birmingham A156.1969. moulded, nos. 13-24 are hand-made)
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VI1.8, fig. 17:6, pI. 8:10; Holland
1977: fig. 7:8. 5.1.4.1. A moulded head from Beth Shemesh. The face is
crude. A band of curls, shaped as rings, appears above the
5.1.2.4. A hollow body from Jerusalem. There are remains of forehead. The head is pointed. Reg. no. 33-4-515.
white-wash. The hands were placed beneath the breasts Context: silo inside room 452, level III or II.
(now both broken). Reg. no. C.322. Note: Engle classified this head as his "foreign" type, but it is
Context: cave 1. different than all his other "foreign" heads.
Place: Romema, IAA 68-788. Literature: AS III: pI. 22:6.1, fig. 4; AS IV: pI. 51:20; Holland
Literature: Holland 1975: B.V11.9, fig. 18:1, pI. 8:11; Holland 1975: All.e.2; Engle 1979: type VIII:201.
1977: fig. 7:9.
5.1.4.2. A moulded head from Beth Shemesh. Either a
5.1.2.5. Lower body part from Jerusalem. The base is drawing or a photograph was not published. Reg. no. 883.
missing. Reg. no. C.258. Context: debris near the north-western cemetry.
Context: cave 1. Literature: AS 11:24; Holland 1975: P.l.a.7.
Place: Toronto.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII.10, fig. 18:2; holland 5.1.4.3. A moulded head from Jerusalem. Only the face
1977:140. survived, thus exact classification is impossible. Reg. no.
378.
5.1.2.6. An upper body part from Tel Beer Sheba. The hands Context: locus A107.6.
are placed on the chest. The breasts are small and not Place: Birmingham, 1962.a.345.
separated. The depression for a peg remained at the upper Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.r.3.
end of the body. Reg. no. 7642/1.
Context: locus 772, level IV, 9th (?) century BC. 5.1.4.4. A moulded head from Jerusalem. It has a peg. The
Place: Tel Aviv. drawing is not very clear, thus it is hard to classify this head.
246
Context: not yet published.
Place: Birmingham.
Note: I could not locate this head there.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.r.2.
5.1.4.5. A moulded head from Jerusalem. It has a very high
headdress and probably side-locks.
Context: not yet published.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXII.L.1, fig. 13:5, pI. 5:3.
5.1.4.6. A moulded head from Jerusalem. There are remains
of white-wash and red paint. Holland called the hair
"pompadour" dress. The drawing is not very clear.
Context: not yet published.
Place: probably at Romema, IAA no. 68-809, reg. no. 6671,
now in an exhibition elsewhere.
Literature: Holland 1975: A.XII.g.1, fig. 13:2.
5.1.4.7. A moulded head from Jerusalem. The face is elegant
and well preserved. There are large ears. The head is
flattened from above.
Context: under the floor of a Byzantine building.
Note: Holland classified two photographs of this head as
separate heads.
Literature: Duncan 1925: fig. 19; Macalister and Duncan
1926:187, fig. 198:upper; Holland 1975: AIV.e =
AVl.a;
Engle 1979: type VII:40.
5.1.4.8. A moulded head from Jerusalem. It is small and the
face is fine and well preserved. There is a sort of a turban
above the forehead, without any curls.
Context: unknown.
Note: The head is not similar to the JPF, and may belong to
a later period.
Literature: Duncan 1925: fig. 18:center; Macalister and
Duncan 1926:187, fig. 197.
5.1.4.9. A moulded head from Lachish. The face is elegant
and well preserved. There is a hairdress and the remains of
white-wash and red paint.
Context: locus 1008, probably a court in a building. Level III
(?), 8th century BC.
Note: Holland classified this head as type B, but this is not
very clear. According to the report it is a head of a male
figurine (Lachish 111:374).
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:10; Holland 1975: B.VI.31.
5.1.4.10. A moulded head from Lachish. The face is
surrounded with a simple hair or hairdress and there are
large ears.
Context: not clear.
Note: Holland classified this head as type B, but it different
from the other heads of this type. According to the report it is
a head of a male.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:15; Holland 1975: B.VI.30.
5.1.4.11. A moulded head and upper body from Lachish. The
figure holds a disk of clay with its right hand. There is a kind
of a hairdress and side-locks. The body is not a pillar body.
Context: locus 500, without clear context.
247
Note: it may be a figurine from a later period than the Iron
Age.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 32:3; Holland 1975: AXll.n.1.
5.1.4.12. A moulded head from Tell en-Nasbeh. It has large
ears and a simple hairdress.
Context: room 445, probably a large court with installations
and pits, in a residential area.
Place: Rockefeller 35.3091.
Literature: TN I: pI. 85:29; Holland 1975: AXll.r.7.
5.1.4.13. A hand-made head from Tel Beer Sheba. It is
pointed at the back. The nose is applied and the eyes are
incised. There is an incised line on the neck. Reg. no.
15455/2.
Context: locus 1789, level IV.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.4.14. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. It is fairly
similar to the heads of the JPF, but has an elongated chin or
beard. The eyes are applied and the head is perforated.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: pI. 16:30; Holland
1975: AI.i.22, fig. 4:8, pI. 2:1.
5.1.4.15. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. It is fairly
similar to the heads of the JPF, but has an elongated chin or
beard. The eyes are applied and the head is perforated.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Holland 1975: AI.i.21, fig. 4:7, pI. 1:12.
5.1.4.16. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. It is pinched by
hand, but the mouth, nostrils and eyebrows are incised. The
eyes are made of applied disks. Reg. no. 6718.
Context: L.857.10, a late fill.
Place: Romema, IAA. no. 68-804.
Literature: Holland 1975: A.1.i.23, fig. 4:9; Jerusalem I: fig.
12:11.
5.1.4.17. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. A small part of
the chest is also preserved. The figure holds an object in one
hand, but it is placed on the figure's back. The object is
decorated with check patterns of red and black (according to
the card at Romema, these are brown and white). Reg. no.
7056.
Context: not published, possibly AA.4.8.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-802.
Literature: Holland 1975: Al.h.1, fig. 4:4, pI. 1:10.
5.1.4.18. A hand-made head from Jerusalem. The eyes are
incised. There is a long chin (beard?) and a kind of a
hairdress around the face. Reg. no. 7052.
Context: AA.101.15.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 68-801.
Note: this head may belong to the Persian period; in any
case, it is not similar to the JPF.
Literature: Holland 1975: A.l.j.5, fig. 5:7.
.J
5.1.4.19. A hand-made head and upper body part from Tell
en-Nasbeh. According to the report it is a crude figure,
possibly representing a bird. According to Zorn, it is a female
figure with its hands holding its breasts. Reg. no. M.2680.
Context: room 551, square AF/17.
Place: Rockefeller, 35.3162.
Literature: TN i: pl. 86:23.
5.1.4.20. A hand-made head from Jericho. It has one row of
curls, or hairdress, above the forehead, and triangular side-
locks (cf. figurines 5.111.8.2-3 above, but they are not really
similar to this head).
Context: area H, unstratified.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXIL f.1, fig. 13:1; Jericho IV:555,
fig. 224:5.
5.1.4.21. A hand-made head from Jericho. It is crudly
shaped. Reg. no. 1318.
Context: trench II, unstratified.
Literature: Jericho IV:555, fig. 223:7.
5.1.4.22. A hand-made head from Abu Ghosh. It has large
ears, applied disk-eyes and an applied and incised mouth. It
resembles the coastal heads of type 5.IV.3.
Context: a cave?
Literature: Vincent 1907: fig. 100; RB 1906:286; Holland
1975: B.III.b.2.
5.1.4.23. A hand-made head from Kh. Rabud. The body is
very thin and solid. The eyes are made of applied disks. It
may have been a rider (?).
Literature: Kochavi 1974: n.6, fig. 8:12.
5.1.4.24. A hand-made head from the City of David,
Jerusalem (season 1981). It is solid and has "ring" eyes with
applied pupils (only one survived). There is an incised ridge
above the forehead, with a line of round impressed (reed?)
marks beneath it. The mouth is incised. Reg. no. G.1138.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5: Miscellaneous Body Parts
5.1.5.1. A solid body from Bethel. At least one arm is uplifted
(the second is missing). The figure may have held
something. Reg. no. 328.
Context: locus 44, a domestic building in area I, Iron Age I
period.
Literature: Kelso 1968:84, 116, pI. 45:14; Holland 1975:
AX.g.2.
5.1.5.2. A solid body from Bethel. It has a protrusion, but the
photograph is not very clear. Reg. no. 560.
Context: area I, perhaps Iron Age I period.
Literature: Kelso 1968:84, 116, pI. 45:13; Holland 1975:
AXI.1.
248
5.1.5.3. A solid body from Beth Shemesh. There is no
representation of breasts, and the figure holds an object
close to its body.
Context: level III, season 1931, exact context unknown.
Place: Rockefeller i.10558 (or P.1092?).
Literature: not yet published, but may be Holland 1975:
P.III.1.
5.1.5.4. A solid body from Jerusalem. The hands were
probably placed on the chest. The drawing of Holland is "on
the side", as if it is an animal's body.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Holland 1975: P.1I1.12, fig. 69:9, pI. 40:5.
5.1.5.5. A solid body from Jerusalem. There are some
remains of white-wash. The hands are probably uplifted.
Context: not published.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXI.8, fig. 10:1O.
5.1.5.6. A solid female body from Jerusalem. There are
breasts and legs (now broken).
Context: not published.
Place: St. Andrews.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.a.2, fig. 14:8.
5.1.5.7. A solid body from Jerusalem. It is not a pillar body.
The photograph is not very clear.
Context: not published.
Place: Sydney.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXIII.c.5, pI. 6:4.
5.1.5.8. A solid body from Jerusalem. The base is concave
and there are remains of White-wash, but the exact nature of
this fragment is not clear.
Cotext: not published.
Place: St. Andrews.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.16, fig. 10:8.
5.1.5.9. A solid body from Lachish. It is very crude, with arms
extended sideways and small breasts. The fingers are
indicated and the belly is rounded (indicating pregnancy?).
Context: locus 56, level VI, the end of the Late Bronze age
period (?).
Literature: Lachish V: pI. 21:4, pI. 33:1.
5.1.5.10. A solid body from Tell Beit Mirsim. The arms are
placed beside the body. There is probably an indication of a
dress with horizontal lines. Reg. no. SN.1226.
Context: square SE13, level A
Place: Rockefeller, i.8945.
Literature: TBM III: pI. 29:11, pI. 55:12; Holland 1975:
AX1.49.
5.1.5.11. A solid body from Tel Masos. It is solid, polished
and painted black. According to the report it has horns. Reg.
no. 3594/1.
Context: room 775, 7th century BC.
Literature: Masos I: pI. 110:1.
5.1.5.12. A solid body from Tel Beer Sheba. There are female
breasts and a protruding belly. Reg. no. 8409/1.
Context: locus 881, levels III-II?
Place: Romema, IAA 1993-20.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.13. A solid body from Tel Beer Sheba. It is a pillar
body, but an exceptional one, because it has a kind of a
protruding disk in its middle (not applied). Reg. no. 15126/1.
Context: casemate room 1684, the area of the storehouses
of level II, 8th century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.14. A solid body from Tel Beer Sheba. It may be a
female pillar body with exceptional protrusions, or the body
of an animal with broken hind legs and a tail. Reg. no.
7671/1.
Context: locus 818, the Hellenistic period.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Note: it may be a figurine from a later period; the clay is not
typical to the Iron Age figurines.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.15. A solid body from Arad. There is a strange
protrusion, of an unclear nature. The fragment is red-slipped.
Reg. no. C.183/1.
Context: not published.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.16. A solid body from Tel Harasim. The hands are
placed on the belly. It is described as a naked female in the
preliminary report, but the drwaing has no indications of
breasts. It is white-washed. Reg. no. 5044.
Context: locus 609, levels III, 7th century BC or later.
Place: with the excavation team.
Literature: Giveon 1994: fig. 14:14.
5.1.5.17. A solid body from Tel Harasim. The hands are
broken. It is described as a naked female in the preliminary
report. There are marks of breakage on the chest. Reg. no.
5075.
Context: locus 611, levels III, 7th century BC or later.
Note: it may have been a rider's body.
Place: with the excavation team.
Literature: Giveon 1994: fig. 14:13.
5.1.5.18. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem
(season 1982). There are no signs of breasts. One arm is
placed horizontally on the body. Reg. no. 0/12754.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.19. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem
(season 1983). There are no signs of breasts. One arm is
placed diagonally across the body. Reg. no. E3/15570.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
249
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.20. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem
(season 1982). It is not a pillar body. There are small female
breasts. The arms are uplifted (?) - now broken. Reg. no.
0/12762.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.21. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem
(season 1980). It is small and nearly whole, but too small to
be a JPF. There are a few remains of white-wash, but no
visible breasts. Height 48 mm. Reg. no. G/8228.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
Note: it may be a rider's body.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.22. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem
(season 1978). It is a pillar body, but exceptional; it has no
breasts and the arms are plced on the belly. Reg. no.
E/2779.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.23. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem
(season 1978). It is a pillar body, but exceptional; it has no
breasts and the arms are extended to the sides (now
broken). Reg. no. E/2711.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.5.24. A solid body from the City of David, Jerusalem
(season 1984). The breasts are not indicated. One arm is
placed on the chest, the other lies low on the body. The base
is concave. Reg. no. E1/19593. Height: 65 mm.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.6: Miscellaneous Fragments (not
Classified)
5.1.6.1. A fragment from Beth Shemesh (season 1933).
Either a drawing or a photograph was not published.
Context: alley, or room 379, cf. figurine no. 6 below.
Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.l.a.6.
5.1.6.2. A fragment from Beth Shemesh. Either a drawing or
a photograph was not published.
Context: debris near the west-northern cemetry.
Literature: AS 11:19; Holland 1975: P.l.a.1.
5.1.6.3. A fragment from Beth Shemesh (season 1929).
Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. It is
 described as having incisions on the neck, breasts and body.
Reg. no. 881.
Context: debris near the north-western cemetry.
Literature: AS 11:24; Holland 1975: P.l.a.3.
5.1.6.4. A fragment from Beth Shemesh (season 1933).
Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Reg.
no. 33-4-438.
Context: room 388 in a building of level II, 8th century BC at
the latest.
Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.l.a.4.
5.1.6.5. A fragment from Beth Shemesh (season 1933).
Either a drawing or a photograph was not published. Reg.
no. 33-4-184.
Context: alley 379, cf. figurine no. 1 above.
Literature: AS 111:96; Holland 1975: P.l.a.5.
5.1.6.6. A fragment from Tel Ira. It may be a part of a vessel,
with breasts modelled on the outside. There are remains of
white-wash and brown slip. Reg. no. 3536/1.
Context: locus 402-6.
Note: a very similar fragment, at least in shape, is known
from Buseirah (Holland 1975: P.lIl.a; Amr 1980: no. 28).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of Y. Beit Arieh.
5.1.6.7. A fragment from Bethel (season 1934). It was
defined in the report as a male, hollow head. Either a
drawing or a photograph was not published.
Context: south of a probing pit, Iron Age II. Exact locus not
defined.
Literature: Kelso 1968:83, no. 96; Holland 1975: P.l.a.1.
5.1.6.8. A small head from the City of David, Jerusalem.
(season 1979). It is not a head of a JPF. Reg. no. E/5631.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1.6.9. A small head from the City of David, Jerusalem.
(season 1982). It is not a head of a JPF. Reg. no. E1/1073.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
5.11. Other Related Figurines
(Mainly from Judah)
5.11.1: Lamp-Figurines with Pillar Bodies
5.11.1.1. A whole figurine from Ein Genin (near Buseirah). It
carries a lamp on the head and holds a disk with both hands.
The eyes and the nose are applied and the nostrils are
impressed. The body is hollow. The elongated face creates
the impression of a male (but this feature is found in many
Transjordanian figurines, including female ones).
Context: surface find.
Place: Amman, J.14053.
Literature: Harding 1937: pI. 9:1-2; Glueck 1945:150f, fig.
80:left; Holland 1975: K.ll.b.2; Isserlin 1976:139; Amr 1980:
no. 31a, pI. 5:2a, 6.
250
5.11.1.2. A head from Ein Genin (near Buseirah). It is similar
to figurine no. 1 (above).
Context: surface find.
Literature: Harding 1937: pI. 10:6-7; Glueck 1945:150f, fig.
80:center; Holland 1975: K.ll.b.3; Isserlin 1976:139; Homes-
Fredericq 1987:39.
5.11.1.3. A head from Beth Shemesh. It carries a lamp. There
are large ears and appliedlincised details. Reg. no. NS.208.
Context: "square" V41, season 1931, without an exact locus.
Place: Rockefeller i.10551.
Literature: AS II: pI. 45:20; Glueck 1945: fig. 81:center.
5.11.1.4. A whole figurine from Tel Beit Mirsim. It has a solid,
pillar body and a lamp above the head. There are three
small protrusions under the lamp. Reg. no. SN.656.
Context and date: square 33, a cistern under room 15 (in the
buildings between the street and the city wall). Level A, 8th
century BC.
Literature: TBM III: pI. 32:2, pI. 57b:2.
[Fig. 8:1].
5.11.2: Bird Figurines with Pillar Bases
5.11.2.1. A body from Gezer. The head is missing.
Context: grave 28, Iron Age II (Gezer 1:311f).
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 73:14; Holland 1975: El.a.1.
5.11.2.2. A body from Gezer. The drawing indicates a pillar
body, but the shape of the rest is not clear. There is a broken
part in the middle of the body, which is hard to explain as
part of a bird figurine.
Context: not published.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 126: 10; Holland 1975: E.1. b.1.
5.11.2.3. A solid body from Hazor. The tail, wings and head
are missing. There may have been a pillar base, but this is
not certain. Reg. no. A.3045.
Context: locus 60, the slope outside the buildings of area A,
without clear stratification.
Note: I have included this fragment for reasons of doubt, but
it is probably different from the Judean bird figurines.
Literature: Hazor I III: pI. LXVI:33; Holland 1975: E.l.a.2.
5.11.2.4. A body from Jerusalem. The head and the wings are
missing.
Context: wash at the entrance to cave 1, or square 26 near
this cave (Jerusalem 11:128).
Place: discarded after excavation. '
Note: a whole figurine is restored from fragments in the final
report (Jerusalem II: fig. 7-4), but a separate drawing of each
fragment is not given. According to the report, 7 other
figurines of this type were found in the cave or nearby. It
seems these are already included in the work of Holland (in
his type E1, figurines no. 4-14 below).
Literature: Holland 1975: El.a.4, fig. 36:2.
5.11.2.5. A base and a beginning of the body from Jerusalem.
Context: not published.
Place: Sydney.
Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.5, pI. 18:2.
5.11.2.6. A fragment from Jerusalem. Either a drawing or
photograph was not published.
Context: not published.
Place: Leeds.
Literature: Holland 1975: El.a.6.
5.11.2.7. A base and a beginning of the body from Jerusalem.
Context: not published.
Place: Oxford.
Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.7, pI. 18:3, fig. 36:3.
5.11.2.8. A base and a beginning of the body from Jerusalem.
Context: not published.
Place: Birmingham.
Literature: Holland 1975: El.a.8, fig. 36:4.
5.11.2.9. A nearly whole figurine from Jerusalem, including
the head.
Context: not published.
Place: Romema.
Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.9, fig. 36:5.
5.11.2.10. A base and a beginning of the body from
Jerusalem.
Context: not published.
Place: discarded after excavation.
Literature: Holland 1975: El.a.10, pI. 18:4, fig. 36:6.
5.11.2.11. A nearly whole body from Jerusalem.
Context: not published.
Place: Toronto.
Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.11, fig. 36:7.
5.11.2.12. A nearly whole body from Jerusalem.
Context: not published.
Place: Louisville, Southern Baptist Seminary.
Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.a.12, fig. 36:8.
5.11.2.13. A whole figurine from Jerusalem. It has applied,
disk shaped eyes. The pupils are shown as small
indentations. There is a band on the neck with indented
decorations.
Context: not published.
Literature: Holland 1975: E.1. a.12a, addenda, pI. 46: 8.
5.11.2.14. A base and lower body from Jerusalem.
Context: not published.
Place: Birmingham.
Literature: Holland 1975: E.l.b.2, fig. 37:1, pI. 18:5.
5.11.2.15. A whole figurine from Lachish. The wings are
spread. Reg. no. 1268.
Context and date: tomb 1002, 8th century BC.
Place: Rockefeller, 34.125.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 28:12; Holland 1975: E.l.a.?
[Fig. 8:2].
5.11.2.16. A whole figurine from Lachish. It has a small,
flattened base. The wings are spread sideways and
backwards. There are applied disk-eyes. Reg. no. 2020.
Context and date: locus 367, level III?
Place: Tel Aviv.
251
Note: I have included this figurine, but it is exceptional in
comparison to the other figurines from Judah (the base and
the applied eyes).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Lachish
excavation team.
5.11.2.17. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. Reg.
no. M.465.
Context: cistern 159, 8th-7th centuries BC.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 47:18, pI. 90:6; Holland 1975: E.l.b.4.
5.11.2.18. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. Reg.
no. M.381.
Context: cistern 143.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 90:3; Holland 1975: E.l.a.16.
5.11.2.19. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. The
published drawing is very unclear.
Context: room 556, square AEl18, level II. It is a small room
of unknown nature (TN 1:182).
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 90:4; Holland 1975: E.l.a.17.
5.11.2.20. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. Reg.
no. x29.
Context: room 360.
Note: Holland classified figurines 5.11.2.20-21 as birds on
pillar bases, but the report describes them as stands (with
horns?; TN 1:241, 236n). There is no reference to them in the
section on bird-figurines in appendix A of the report. Even if
Holland is wrong, the report mentions at least 6 figurines of
birds on pillar bases (see note in figurine no. 22 below).
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 84:17; Holland 1975: E.l.a.18.
5.11.2.21. A base and lower body from Tel en-Nasbeh. Reg.
no. x9.
Context: room 349 (cf. note to figurine no. 20 above).
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN I: pI. 84:18; Holland 1975: E.l.a.19.
5.11.2.22. A base of a bird figurine from Tel en-Nasbeh.
Note: according to appendix A (TN 1:273, #7), 14 bird
figurines were found in the excavations. Of these, 9 were
published with drawings or photographs (TN I: pI. 90:1-9).
The report mentioned 9 body fragments (within the 14), of
which at least 6 fragments had pillar bases. I have therefore
added a sixth fragment here, but further details are not
known.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:273.
5.11.2.23. A nearly whole figurine from Tel es-Safi. One wing
is broken. The eyes are applied.
Context: not published.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 137, fig. 50; Holland
1975: E.l.a.20.
 5.11.2.24. A base and body from Tel Beer Sheba. It has a
high neck, but the head is missing as well as the tail. Reg.
no. 3962/1.
Context: not published.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.11.2.25. A base and lower body from Tel Beer Sheba. The
head and the tail are missing. Reg. no. 5828/1.
Context: locus 407.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.11.2.26. A fragment from Tel Beer Sheba. It is not certain if
there is a pillar base. Reg. no. 16404/1.
Context: locus 1841, in bUilding 32 of level II.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.11.2.27. A base and part of the body from Tel Beit Mirsim.
Reg. no. SN.669.
Context: cistern under building 15 in square 33. Level A
Literature: TBM III: pI. 32:3, pI. 57b:3.
5.11.2.28. A whole figurine from the Jewish Quarter,
Jerusalem. Only a photograph was published.
Literature: Geva, EAEHL New II (Hebrew):619, upper right.
5.11.2.29. A figurine from Jerusalem (the excavations of M.
Broshi at the western wall).
Literature: Barkay 1985: 208 list, and courtesy of G. Barkay.
5.11.2.30-33. Bird figurines (or fragments) from Jerusalem.
They were found in the excavations of M. Broshi at the
western wall. For details cf. figurine no. 29 above.
5.11.2.34. A whole, solid figurine from an unknown origin.
Place: Hecht Museum, University of Haifa, no. H-630 (in the
eXhibition). Height 68 mm.
Note: according to the museum's card, the origin is
Transjordan (?).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Hecht museum.
Notes: I have not included here three other figurines, which
Holland classified as his type E.l.a. The first was found at
Tel Gemmeh, Holland E.l.a.3, but it is probably a kernos and
not a solid figurine (Holland 1975:245, fig. 36:1). The
second, from Megiddo, is exceptional (Holland E.l.a.14). It
has a special decoration and is probably hollow. The third
figurin~ was also found at Megiddo (Holland E.l.b.3). It is
very different from the Judean bird figurines. The two
~g.urines from Megiddo were photographed from above, and
It IS not clear if they have pillar bases. Both seem hollow,
and Schumacher even thought that they functioned as lamps
(1908: 101).
I ha:ve not included a few other figurines from the City of
David, Jerusalem, which will be published in the near future
by the excavation team.
252
5.11.3: Male Figurines
Often, figurines are defined as male without sufficient
evidence, though there are many cases where exact
definitions of sex are impossible.
5.11.3.1. A hand-made head from the suq at Beer Sheba,
from excavations in 1965. It has a kind of a beard (?). The
eyes are made as shallow depressions. Reg. no. 119/1.
Context and date: locus 122?, 10th-9th centuries BC.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 1993-432 (probably former no. 70-
5432). It is currently in an exhibition.
Literature: BS 1:117, pI. 47:4, pI. 79:32.
[Fig. 8:3].
5.11.3.2. A hand-made head from Tel en-Nasbeh. It has a
kind of a beard (?) and a band on the forehead. Reg. no.
M.885.
Context: cistern 216 in square P/17, 8th-7th centuries BC.
Place: Berkeley?
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 86:6; Holland 1975: Al.b.8.
5.11.3.3. A hand-made head from Jerusalem (excavations of
A Mazar). It has a hat, applied ears, and a beard (?). It is
covered with white-wash and red paint. Reg. no. 194.
Context: locus 6015, either a tomb or a refuse dump. Iron
Age II period.
Note: it may have been the head of a rider figurine.
Literature: Nadelman 1989:123ff, pI. 29:9.
5.11.3.4. A hand-made head from the City of David,
Jerusalem (season 1980). It is pointed and the eyes are
pinched by hand. There are white-wash, a beard and tiny
ears. It may have been the head of a rider (?). Height: 30
mm. Reg. no. E1/8494.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.111. Moulded Heads from the
southern Coastal Plain and Northern
Israel
5.111.1: 'Schematic Heads' with Neck-
Pendants from the Coastal Plain
5.111.1.1. A head from Kh. Hoga.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Gophna 1970:29, pI. 7:6; Holland 1975: B.VI.6.a,
addenda.
[Fig. 7:1].
5.111.1.2. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The body is hollow. The hands are placed under the breasts.
Context: CP.190, a small room of a building complex in
Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. 9th century BC?
Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 35:21; Holland 1975: B.IV.a.1,
fig. 16:3.
5.111.1.3 A head from Tel Gemmeh. It was made in the same
mould as no. 2 above.
Note: Holland classified heads 2-3 differently, since in one
the position of the arms is known (a central criterion in
Holland's typological system).
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:16; Pritchard 1943: no. 238;
Holland 1975: B.VI.13.
5.111.1.4. A head from Tel Gemmeh.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 35:8; Pritchard 1943: no. 278;
Holland 1975: B.VI.8.
5.111.1.5. A head from Tel Gemmeh.
Context: EP.186, an open area in Petrie's "22nd dynasty"
city. Petrie dated this level to the Iron Age I.
Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 35:9; Pritchard 1943: no. 279;
Holland 1975: B.VI.9.
5.111.1.6. A head from Tel Gemmeh.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: 17, pI. 35: 10; Pritchard 1943: no. 280;
Holland 1975: B.VI.1 o.
5.111.2: 'Finely Moulded Heads' with Neck-
Pendants from the Coastal Plain
5.111.2.1. A head from Kh. Hoga. The upper part is worn, but
the side-locks and the neck-pendant are clear.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Gophna 1970:29, pI. 6:3; Holland 1975: B.VI.6.b,
addenda.
5.111.2.2. A head from Mefalsim.
Context: surface find.
Place: IAA no. 70-5189, now in the collection at Mefalsim.
Literature: Gophna 1970:29, pI. 6:2; Holland 1975:
B.VI.33.a, addenda.
[Fig. 7:2]
5.111.2.3. A head from Mefalsim. The facial features are worn.
The neck pendant and the side-locks are clear.
Context: surface find.
Place: Romerna, IAA no. 70-5188.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.111.2.4. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The photograph in the
report is not good and the classification is made according to
the text.
Context: BZ, a large open area in a center of a structure
from the "26th dynasty" city. The area is disturbed by
Persian period pits.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:46; Holland 1975: B.VI.26.
5.111.2.5. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact.
Context: AK, a small room in the corner of a public structure
from the "26th dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:44; Holland 1975: B.VI.25.
5.111.2.6. A head from Tel Gemmeh.
Context: "A", a general designation of a structure in the
southern part of the excavations. Height 197". Exact locus
not clear.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:43; Holland 1975: B.VI.24.
5.111.2.7. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact.
253
Context: CW.193, a room in the northern building complex of
the "23rd dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:40; Holland 1975: B.VI.22.
5.111.2.8. A head from Tel Shera. There is a rounded
pendant. The hairdress is peculiar, unlike the other 5.111.2
heads; the side-locks are wider and without inner separation
lengthwise. There are also long horizontal lines above the
forehead.
Context: level VI of the 7th century BC.
Literature: EAEHL IV:1069, bottom left; Oren 1982: 159, left.
[Fig. 7:3].
5.111.2.9. A head from Tel Shera. The peg is intact. The head
is much bigger than the moulded face, leaving a sort of an
unmoulded ledge around the face. The details are similar to
those of the former heads, only the hair is parted in the
middle of the forehead. The thin side-locks reach the height
of the neck.
Context: level VI of the 7th century BC.
Place: exhibited at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem.
Literature: Oren and Netzer 1974: pI. 57d; EAEHL IV:1069,
second from left; Engle 1979: type VIII:22; Oren 1982:159,
center.
[Fig. 7:4].
5.111.2.10. A head from Tel Shera. The peg is intact. There is
a rounded pendant. The hairdress is similar, but not
identical, to head no. 9 above.
Context: level VI of the 7th century BC.
Place: exhibited at the Israel Museum, Jerusalem.
Literature: EAEHL IV:1069, third from left; Oren 1982:159,
right.
5.111.2.11. A head and an upper body part from Mefalsim.
The body is hollow. The hands are placed under the breasts.
There are 3-4 strands of hair behind the ears, descending
almost until the shoulders. The hairdress is similar, but not
identical, to the former 5.111.2 heads. There probably was a
neck-pendant, but the neck is damaged.
Context: surface find.
Place: IAA no. 70-5194, now in the collection at Mefalsim.
Literature: Gophna 1970:27, pI. 6:1; Holland 1975: B.IV.b.3.
5.111.2.12. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact. The
photograph in the report is not good. The hair is parted in the
middle of the forehead. other details cannot be determined.
Context: A195, Petrie's "26th dynasty" level. Exact location
unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:33; Holland 1975: B.VI.19.
5.111.3: 'Finely Moulded Heads' with Combed
doubled Side-Locks from the Coastal Plain
5.111.3.1. A head from Kh. Hoga. Part of the peg survived.
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
[Fig. 7:5].
5.111.3.2. A head from Tel el-Hesi. The peg is intact. height:
52mm.
Note: it is now clear that this is a Persian period head from
level Vc; reg. no. H71 OR596, published in the new final
report (Bennett and Blakely 1989).
Literature: Rose and Toombs 1976:123, fig. 18:3; Bennett
and Blakely 1989:277-279, fig. 208:4.
5.111.3.3. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. It is probably a head with a
part of the peg.
Context: not stratified.
Place: Rockefeller 33.1550.
Note: Holland classified this head as a plaque-figurine, but
according to the photograph and the drawing in the
museum's card, it looks like a head of a pillar-figurine.
Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:43; Pritchard 1943: no. 131;
Holland 1975: C.IX.d.1.
5.111.3.4. A head from Tel Gemmeh. Part of the shoulders
survived, as well as the side-locks.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:29; Holland 1975: B.V1.29.
5.111.3.5. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact.
Context: FL.188, probably 10th-9th centuries BC.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:17; Pritchard 1943: no. 140;
Holland 1975: B.VI.14.
5.111.3.6. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The
body is hollow but the base is clear. The hands were placed
on the chest, or perhaps extended to the sides. It may have
been made in the same mould as no. 5 above.
Context: CP.187, a small room in a large building complex in
the "23rd dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:13; Holland 1975: B.IV.b.1, fig.
16:4, pI. 7:5.
5.111.3.7. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The peg is intact. The
photograph is blurred and it is not clear if the side-locks are
combed; hence, if this head is similar to the rest of type
5.111.5 heads.
Context: FP.188, a large open area in the city of the 22nd
dynasty".
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:11; Holland 1975: B.V1.11.
5.111.3.8. A head from Tel Erani. It has the remains of the
peg. The side-locks are very thick and curve along the face,
nearly merging far below the chin. They are probably not
combed.
Context: probably area A, levels IV-V.
Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: third row, third from the left;
Holland 1975: B.VI.5.
5.111.3.9. A moulded head from Ekron. It has two combed
side-locks. Height:65 mm.
Context: area I SW.
Literature: Gitin 1994:73, fig. 4.1.7.
5.111.4: 'Finely Moulded Heads' with Uncombed
doubled Side-Locks from the Coastal Plain
5.111.4.1. A head from Tel Kinnerot. Part of the head and the
peg survived. It is not well preserved. Reg. no. 1315/1.
Hubner classified this head as similar to Holland's AVIII
type, but this seems to be a mistake.
Context: locus 352a, level lA, from the end of the 8th-7th
centuries BC.
Place: Romema IAA no. 85-440.
Literature: Hubner, in: Fritz 1990: 119, pis. 102:3, 42b.
[Fig. 7:6].
5.111.4.2. A head from Megiddo. Part of the peg survived. The
photograph is not very clear. There is probably a neck-
pendant and a ridge above the forehead, but without curls.
254
The side-locks are straight and shorter than in other heads
of this type. Reg. no. M.4306.
Context: locus 1394, a room or a court in square N9, level
III.
Literature: May 1935:119, pI. 25:M.4306; Holland 1975:
AXll.k.3.
5.111.4.3. A head from Megiddo. It is similar to head no. 2
above. Reg. no. M.4554.
Context: room 1521 in square R5, part of a large building
complex. Level III.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.4554; Holland 1975: AXII.k.2.
5.111.4.4. A head from Megiddo. It is similar to heads nos. 2-3
above, but is more elegant. Reg. no. M.4561.
Context: under 1561 in square R10, a room in one of the
'Assyrian' court-houses of level III. The exact nature of the
room is not clear. 8th century BC (?).
Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.4561; Holland 1975: B.VI.34.
5.111.5: 'Crescent' Moulded Heads from the
Coastal Plain
5.111.5.1. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The photograph is
blurred, but it seems that there are 3 rows of curls
surrounding the face. There is a kind of a clay ledge around
the hair.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:12; Holland 1975: B.VI.12.
5.111.5.2. A head from Tel Gemmeh with a peg. There are 3-4
rows of curls above the forehead. The side-locks have 3
columns of curls, reaching until the chin. The ears are
probably not represented.
Context: AT.194 from Petrie's "26th dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:42; Holland 1975: B.VI.23.
5.111.5.3. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. The
hands hold a large disk close to the hollow body. The
hairdress is similar to that of head no. 2 (above).
Note: Petrie thought that the disk represents a cake and that
the figure is the Biblical "queen of heaven".
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:14; Pritchard 1943: type
V:167; Holland 1975: B.V.d.1.
[Fig. 7:7].
5.111.5.4. A head from Tel el-Far'ah (South) with a peg.
Height 75 mm.
Context: unknown.
Place: Rockefeller 35.4360.
Literature: not yet published (?), courtesy of the Israel
Antiquities Authority.
5.111.6: Drum-Playing Pillar-Figurines with
Hollow Bodies and Moulded Heads, from
Northern Israel
5.111.6.1. A nearly whole figurine from Megiddo. The body is
hollow and made as a vessel on the wheel. The hands hold a
disk perpendicular to the chest. The fingers are represented.
The hair is indicated by many incisions, vertical above the
forehead and horizontal on the sides of the face. There is
probably a pendant on the forehead. The face is rather
crudely made.
Context: the 'palace' of level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: 102, fig. 156; Pilz 1924: type
E.97; Pritchard 1943: V:163; Keel 1972: fig. 454; Holland
1975: B.V1.23.
[Fig. 7:8].
5.111.6.2. A head and an upper body part from Megiddo. It is
similar to no. 1 above, but has a neck pendant.
Context: room 07.1538 in an 'Assyrian' court-house of level
III.
Note: head no. 5 (below) was found in the same locus.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.1119; Holland 1975: B.VI.39.
5.111.6.3. A head and part of a peg from Megiddo. It is
probably similar to nos. 1-2 above, but badly preserved.
Context: surface find.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.1489; Holland 1975: B.VI.40.
5.111.6.4. A head from Megiddo. It is similar to nos. 1-2
above, but the side-locks are longer.
Context: surface find from square 0.12, area C.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.1496; Holland 1975: B.VI.41.
5.111.6.5. A head and part of a peg from Megiddo.
Context: room 07.1538 in an 'Assyrian' court-house of level
III.
Note: head no. 2 (above) was found in the same room.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.4647; Holland 1975: B.VI.42.
5.111.6.6. A head and part of a peg from Megiddo. It is badly
preserved. The excavators suggested that it was made in the
same mould as head no. 5 (above).
Context: area 08, surface find.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 25:M.1633; Holland 1975: B.VI.38.
5.111.6.7. A head with an upper body part from Samaria. The
woman holds a drum diagonally to her body. There is a
pendant on the forehead. Reg. no. 0.4629.
Context: ON, exact locus unknown.
Note: the position of the drum is similar to that of the
Phoenician figurines, type 5.VI.2 (below), but the shape of
the head is different.
Literature: Samaria III: pI. 11:8; Holland 1975: B.vl.e.1; Beck
1991: note 3:18.
5.111.7: Various Moulded Heads from Northern
Israel
5.111.7.1. A head from Beth Shean. It has very large ears and
a unique shape.
Context: level VII, Late Bronze Age period (?).
Place: Rockefeller i.3840.
Literature: Row 1940: pI. 53a:1-2; Holland 1975: AXll.q.1.
5.111.7.2. A head from Beth Shean. It is covered with red slip
and portrays a female. The side-locks reach the shoulders,
probably descending behind the ears. Reg. no. P.29-103-
906.
Context: locus 1076, an open area or a room of level V. Iron
Age I period.
Literature: Row 1940: pI. 53a:17; James 1966: fig. 111:5;
Holland 1975: AXll.c.1.
5.111.7.3. A head from Beth Shean. There are ears and a
'feathers' hairdress. Reg. no. P29-103-875.
Note: it may have been a plaque-figurine.
255
Context: locus 125, level IV.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:6; Holland 1975: AXll.e.1.
5.111.7.4. A head from Beth Shean. Black clay. It is difficult to
classify this head exactly. It probably has 'Hathor' side-locks
reaching the shoulders. There are incisions on the back.
Reg. no. 31-9-133.
Context: room 1557, upper level V, 10th century BC (?).
Place: Rockefeller 32.4.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 112:3; Holland 1975: All.f.1.
5.111.7.5. A head from Dan. There are side-locks but no ears.
Context: 8th century BC, other details not yet published.
Note: Holland suggested that it may be a Cypriot import.
Literature: Biran 1974:25 and frontispiece photograph;
EAEHL 1:315 upper right; Holland 1975: AXll.q.2; Engle
1979: type VIII:1.
[Fig. 7:9].
5.111.7.6. A head from Hazor. It has a high "hat" and long
side-locks. There are large ears and one row of vertical curls
above the forehead. This head is unique, unlike any of the
other 5.111. 7 heads. Reg. no. 1463/1.
Context: room 3147 south of the fort, level IV. Perhaps it
originates from level Va. 8th or 7th centuries BC.
Literature: Hazor II: pis. 103:1, 163:8; Yadin 1957:5;
Holland 1975: AXIl. i.1.
5.111.7.7. A head from Hazor. It has one row of vertical curls
above the forehead and long side-locks without curls. The
ears are not represented. The head is long and pointed, and
has a hole near its top. Reg. no. 1787/1.
Contex and date: pool 169, area A It may be a wine-press or
some other installation. The area is not well defined. Level
VI, 9th-8th centuries BC.
Literature: Hazor II: pis. 86:15, 163:4; Holland 1975:
AIV.E.1; Engle 1979: VIII:203.
5.111.7.8. A head from Megiddo. It has a high 'hat' and long
side-locks. Horizontal lines are incised on the 'hat'. The
published drawing is not very good.
Context: a room in the 'palace' of level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 32b; Holland 1975:
AXll.k.1.
5.111.7.9. A head from Megiddo. It has long, curving side-
locks. The photograph does not permit a close study of the
features. It may be a head of type 5.111, but also a head of a
plaque-figurine (?).
Context: Schumacher's "Nordburg", level III, near tomb F.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 79:b; Pilz 1924: Fb:107;
Pritchard 1943: Vllla:271; Holland 1975: AIV.f.8; Engle
1979: type VIII:204.
5.111.7.10. A head from Megiddo. The published photograph
is not very good. There are no ears.
Context: the "pillars room", level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 163:b; Holland 1975:
AIV.b.1.
5.111.7.11. A hollow head and upper body part from Megiddo.
The hair is parted in the middle. The combed side-locks
descend behind the ears.
Context: R.10.654, domestic bUildings (?) in area A Level I,
the Persian period (?).
Place: Rockefeller 36.932.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 24:M.2213; Pritchard 1943: VII:223;
Holland 1975: B.IV.b.4.
5.111.7.12. A head and upper body part from Megiddo. It is
covered with red slip. The position of the arms is not clear.
Holland thought that one hand holds a veil (?) under the chin
(like a few fragments of type 5.VI.5, see below).
Context: locus M.5, surface find.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 29:M.1634; Holland 1975: B.V.f.1.
5.111.7.13. A head from Megiddo. It is badly preserved. There
are remains of side-locks that reach the shoulders.
Context: locus W1727, probably a paved court in a building
of level VI. Iron Age I.
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:21, M.5718; Holland 1975:
B.VI.34.
5.111.7.14. A head with a peg from Megiddo. The side-locks
reach the chin. The photograph is not very clear.
Context: the pillars room, level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: fig. 163a; Holland 1975:
B.VI.36.
5.111.7.15. A head with a peg from Megiddo. There are side-
locks and one indented pupil.
Context: room 08.1501, in a large public building of level II.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:MA551; Holland 1975: B.VI.35.
5.111.7.16. A head with a peg from Megiddo. It is badly
preserved, but still has some traces of red paint.
Context: P9.1026, a little room, probably domestic. Level II.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.3287; Holland 1975: B.VI.37.
5.111.7.17. A head from Megiddo. It is badly preserved.
Context: surface find.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1500; Holland 1975: B.VI.44.
5.111.7.18. A head from Megiddo. The long side-locks reach
the neck or the shoulders. The ears are represented.
Context: square K7 in area M.
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:22; Holland 1975: AIV.fA;
Engle 1979: type VIII:10.
5.111.7.19. A head from Megiddo. It is badly preserved. The
side-locks descend behind the ears.
Note: it may be a head of a plaque-figurine.
Context: P10, surface find.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 29:M.1387; Holland 1975: AVl.d.2;
Engle 1979: type VIII:15.
5.111.7.20. A head with a peg from Megiddo. It is unique, with
horizontal bands of zigzag pattern. The ears are very large
and the pupils are indented.
Context: not clear.
Place: Rockefeller 34.1492.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1745; Holland 1975: AVl.b.6;
Engle 1979: type VIII:16.
5.111.7.21. A head from Megiddo. It is unique, having two
ridges or 'ropes' with diagonal incisions. The ears are very
large.
Context: the "pillars" room, level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 162:c; Holland 1975:
AXll.aA.
5.111.7.22. A head from Megiddo. There are long side-locks,
but perhaps this head belongs to heads of type 5.111.6.
Context: the "pillars room", level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 163:c; Holland 1975:
AXll.e.2.
256
5.111.7.23. A head from Megiddo. There are long side-locks
with a few separated strands. The ears are represented,
probably with earrings.
Note: this may have been a head of a plaque-figurines.
Context: the "pillars room", level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 162:d; Holland 1975:
AXII.d.1.
5.111.7.24. A head from Megiddo. It has incised eyes and a
"pompadour" hairdress, covered with red slip.
Context: surface find in area M9.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.2009; Holland 1975: AXll.g.2.
5.111.7.25. A head from Megiddo. It has one row of rounded
depressions above the foreheads and large ears.
Note: this head is reminiscent of a head from Kenyon's
excavations in Jerusalem (the last may be later than the Iron
Age, 5.1.4.8 above). Reg. no. A293.
Context: area S=2048, south (?) of room 2048 in the 'tower'
temple of level VII. Late Bronze age.
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 242:12; Holland 1975: AXll.a.3.
5.111.7.26. A head from Megiddo. It is peculiar and very
crude. The hair, or the Wig, is indicated by vertical lines and
side-locks behind large ears. The pupils were inlayed (now
missing). For a similar head cf. no. 27 below.
Context: the "pillars room", level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 162:a-b; Holland 1975:
AXII.0.1.
5.111.7.27. A head from Megiddo. It is similar to head no. 26
(above).
Context: R.11 in Schumacher's trench, level III of the
American team.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1008; Holland 1975: AXII.0.2.
5.111.7.28. A head from Samaria. It has a few ridges above
the forehead, perhaps curled. The ears are probably
represented, but are not clear in the photograph. The side-
locks reach the neck at least. There are some remains of red
slip. Reg. no. CA29B.
Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC.
Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:2; Holland 1975: AIV.gA.
5.111.7.29. A head from Samaria. It has two ridges of rounded
lumps, or curls above the forehead. There are probably ears
with earrings and remains of red slip. Reg. no. 0.2224.
Context: ac, an area near the north acropolis. The exact
locus is unknown.
Note: the head may belong to a period later than the Iron
Age.
Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:7; Holland 1975: AIV.h.1.
5.111.7.30. A head from Samaria. It has at least two ridges of
vertical curls above the forehead. The side-locks descend
behind the ears until the neck. It is similar to head no. 28
above. Reg. no. CA05.
Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC.
Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:4; Holland 1975: AIV.g.5.
5.111.7.31. A head from Samaria. It has circles and incised
lines above the forehead and ears. There are remains of red
slip. Reg. no. C.1271.
Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC.
Place: Rockefeller 33.3218.
Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:3; Holland 1975: AXll.a.5.
5.111.7.32. A head from Samaria. It has a very high
headdress, perhaps representing feathers. There are
remains of red slip. Reg. no. C.1026a.
Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC.
Place: Rockefeller 33.2157.
Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:3; Holland 1975: AXII.a.5.
5.111.7.33. A head from Samaria. It is partly broken. There is
one row of large, rounded balls of clay (curls?).
Context: not clear.
Note: Holland thought that this head was made in a hollow
mould. If true, it may have belonged to figurines of type 5.IV
(below).
Place: Rockefeller?
Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.h.2.
5.111.7.34. A head and neck from Samaria. It is covered with
red slip and cannot be classified exactly.
Context: not stratified.
Place: London?
Literature: Holland 1975: AXII.q.4.
5.111.7.35. A head from Samaria. It is broken. There is not
enough published data for an exact classification. There are
remains of red slip. Reg. no. C.1283.
Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC (according to the
museum's card, level G).
Place: Rockefeller 33.3222.
Literature: Samaria 111:80, catalogue no. 16; Holland 1975:
Vol. 11:101, AXll.r.9, fig. 13:10.
5.111.7.36. A head and upper body part from Samaria. There
are side-locks (or a veil?) that reach the shoulders. The left
hand holds the edge of this veil, like some later figurines of
the classical periods. Holland classified it as having a hollow
body (his B type). Reg. no. C.1026b.
Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC.
Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:10; Holland 1975: B.V.f.2,
pI. 44:2.
5.111.7.37. A head from Samaria. The peg is intact. There is a
representation of the ears and a few ridges above the
forehead. Reg. no. C.1014.
Context: locus E.207, 8th century BC.
Place: Rockefeller 33.2155.
Literature: Samaria 111:80, pI. 11:1; Holland 1975: B.VI.45.
5.111.7.38. A head from Shechem. A small part of a solid
body survived. The hair is arranged in horizontal lines with
vertical curls above them. There are ears. Reg. no. K-1807.
Note: despite the classification of Holland and Engle, the
head is possibly part of a plaque-figurine. This would also
suit its early date.
Context: area K, a large building from the Late Bronze age.
Place: Rockefeller i.787.
Literature: Sellin 1927:208, pI. 20f; Holland 1975: AIV.g.6;
Engle 1979: type VIII:102.
5.111.7.39. A head and upper body part from Shechem. the
body is hand-made. There is a representation of ears.
Holland compared it with the head from Abu-Ghosh (app.
5.1.4.22 above) and with heads from Ashdod.
Context: not published.
Place: Israel Museum, Jerusalem, IM.51.144.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.q.6, pI. 43:1.
5.111.7.40. A head from Ta'anakh, with a peg. The face is
surrounded with curls of hair, represented by incised lines.
Context: mixed fill, 9th-7th centuries BC (?).
257
Literature: Lapp 1967:36, fig. 25:2; Holland 1975: B.VI.46.
5.111.7.41. A head from Megiddo. It is broken in half. There is
a pendant on the forehead, and a "hat" or a wide headdress.
Context: surface find in square 09.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1373; Holland 1975: A.IV.e.4;
Engle 1979: type VIII:18.
5.111.8: Various Moulded Heads from the
Coastal Plain
5.111.8.1. A head from Ashdod, with part of the peg. The hair
is arranged in triangles at the sides of the head. Reg. no.
1990/1.
Context: locus 1019, square U/16, levels 4-3 (or 1?). The
nature of this locus is not clear (area D).
Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 58:3, fig. 65:2; Holland 1975:
B.VI.3.
5.111.8.2. A head from Ashdod, partly broken. The face is
elongated and surrounded with one large row of curls, which
look like a rope. The ears are not shown. Reg. no. 4842/1.
Context: surface find.
Note: Hachlili compared with heads from Cyprus.
Literature: Ashdod II-III:129, pI. 58:5, fig. 65:1; Holland
1975: B.VI.2.
5.111.8.3. A head from Ashdod. The hair is arranged in
triangles at the sides of the head and horizontal lines above
the forehead. The ears are represented. Reg. no. 1756/1.
Context: locus 1161, square U/16, levels 4-3? The nature of
this locus is not clear (area D).
Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 58:4, fig. 65:12; Holland 1975:
B.X.a.7.
5.111.8.4. A head from Ashdod. it is too worn out for an exact
classification. Reg. no. 1712/1.
Context: locus 1162, square U/1. The date and the nature of
this locus are not clear.
Literature: Ashdod 11-111:128, fig. 64:11; Holland 1975:
B.X.a.6.
5.111.8.5. A head from Gezer. It is strange, with a "hat" (not
applied) and horizontal lines above the forehead.
Context: zone 30, "fourth Semitic" level (i.e., Iron Age II to
the Hellenistic period. Holland dated this head to the Persian
period).
Literature: Gezer 11:77-78, fig. 272; Holland 1975: AXll.q.3.
5.111.8.6. A head from Ashdod. The hair is arranged in side-
locks, reaching at least to the height of the mouth. Hachlili
classified this head as a plaque-figurine, but Holland
classified it as a hollow pillar type. Reg. no. 838/1.
Context: pit 1067, square A/19, level 2.
Literature: Ashdod 11-111:128, fig. 64:10; Holland 1975:
B.X.a.5.
5.111.8.7. A head from Ashdod. The hair is composed of one
ridge of curls, shaped like a rope around the face. The ears
are represented. Reg. no. 463/6.
Context: area A, surface find. .
Note: Holland classified this head as a plaque-figUrine,
probably because of the thin section (drawn in the report). It
is possible, but not certain.
Literature: Ashdod I: pI. 28:8, fig. 47:3; Holland 1975:
C.IX.c.2.
5.111.8.8. A head from Ashdod. Too little remained of the hair
to enable an exact classification, but generally the head is
similar to no. 2 above. Reg. no. 433/4.
Context: locus 1013, square UAl15, level 4. This is a room at
the corner of a large building.
Literature: Ashdod I: pI. 27:3, fig. 43:2; Holland 1975:
C.IX.c.1.
5.111.8.9. A head from Mefalsim, with the beginning of the
peg. There is a 'ledge' of clay around the moulded face. The
hair is arranged in horizontal bands and the ears are
represented. There are possibly side-locks similar to those
found in type 5.111.3 (above).
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.111.8.10. A head from Mefalsim. There is a ledge of clay
around the moulded face. The hair is arranged in a
horizontal band above the forehead, parted into square (?)
curls. There are large ears and probably side-locks reaching
the shoulders. The facial features are badly preserved.
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.111.8.11. A head from Mefalsim, badly preserved. There are
vertical curls above the forehead, large ears and side-locks
until the shoulders.
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.111.8.12. A head from Kh. Hoga. It probably has side-locks
behind the ears, with earrings (?). The upper part of the head
is worn out.
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.111.8.13. A head from Kh. Hoga, partly broken. It has
doubled side-locks with curls. The preservation state is bad.
It is not clear whether the ears are represented.
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.111.8.14. A head from Kh. Hoga, partly broken. Only a part
of one row of curls survived. The eyes are very large and the
face is elongated (perhaps representing a male figure).
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.111.8.15. A head from Kh. Hoga. It has a grotesque look; a
smiling mouth, huge eyes and protruding pupils. There is
one row of vertical curls above the forehead and at the sides
of the face. The ears are not represented.
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.111.8.16. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. It probably has side-
locks, but the photograph does not enable exact
classification.
Context: the area of the gate at the east side of the tell, but
probably outside the gate. The exact locus is unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:44; Holland 1975: B.V1.1.
5.111.8.17. A whole figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. It shows a
playing woman. The musical instrument looks like a long
pole (string instrument?). The body is hollow and the base is
missi~g. The hair is arranged in a ridge around the face,
reaching until the chin.
Context: area PM.1100 (or 1066?, an open area).
Place: Rockefeller 33.1567.
258
Notes: Petrie ascribed this figurine to his "18th dynasty" city,
but Holland and Engle dated it to the 9th-8th centuries BC.
Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 15: upper, 3:5, pI. 16:39;
Pritchard 1943: type VII:225; Keel 1972: fig. 471; Holland
1975: B.V.a.1.
5.111.8.18. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It
has a necklace with three pendants on the neck. The surface
is burnt. The photograph does not show the facial features
clearly. There are probably long side-locks.
Context: GB, the "20th dynasty" city. The head was found in
an open area near a kiln (near point F). The exact locus is
unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:12; Holland 1975: B.VI.27.
5.111.8.19. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. It probably
has thick, doubled side-locks (similar to those of types
5.111.3-5.111.4 above). The bad preservation state does not
enable a clear identification.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VI.28, pI. 8:5, fig. 17:2.
5.111.8.20. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The body is hollow and the hands were probably placed
beneath the breasts. The hair is arranged in long side-locks,
reaching the shoulders (probably of type 5.111.1-5.111.3, but
the photograph is not clear).
Context: W.181; nature and date unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:6; Pritchard 1943: no. 259;
Holland 1975: B.IV.b.2.
5.111.8.21. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The body is hollow. The hair is arranged in curved side-
locks, reaching the neck (perhaps of type 5.111.5 above).
Context: EQ.191, a small room in a building from the "22nd
dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:25; Holland 1975: B.V1.15, pI.
7:8.
5.111.8.22. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The body is hollow. The hair is arranged in one ridge above
the forehead and in straight, short side-locks, descending
behind the ears until the neck. A 'ledge' of clay surrounds
the face, which is well preserved.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:30; Holland 1975: B.VI.16.
5.111.8.23. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The hair is parted in
the middle of the forehead and combed. Possibly, this head
belongs to type 5.111.2. Petrie thought that it represented a
male.
Context: EN.191, an open area in the "23rd dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:10; Holland 1975: B.VI.20.
5.111.8.24. A head with a peg from.Tel Gemmeh. It has long
side-locks, probably crescent-shaped (cf. type 5.111.3 above).
The face is very worn. There is a band on the neck
(necklace?).
Context: DW.193, a large open area, not well defined, near
the edge of the Tell. Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:39; Holland 1975: B.V1.21, pI.
7:12.
5.111.8.25. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. The hair is
arranged in crescent-shaped (?) side-locks, with three
'tassels' at each side. Petrie compared it with another head
(1928: pI. 35:29), and thought that it is a new type, from
around 900 BC and later.
Context: DR.190, probably an open area in the "23rd
dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 35:23; Holland 1975: B.VI.7.
5.111.8.26. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. The hair is
arranged in a sort of an envelope, or kafia close to the face.
The ears and the curls are not apparent. The facial features
are crude.
Context: EF.192, a room or an open area from the "22nd
dynasty" city. It was probably disturbed by a later pit from
the Persian period.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:32; Holland 1975: B.V1.18, pI.
7:10.
5.111.8.27. A head from Tel Gemmeh. The hair surrounds the
face, probably curled above the forehead. There are side-
locks, merging below the chin (according to Holland; thus, it
may be a head of my type 5.111.4). There is a representation
of the ears.
Context: CV.192, a room in a building of the "23rd dynasty"
city. Its nature is not clear. . to Holland, the head is hand-made (1975: vol. 1:100), but he
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:31; Holland 1975: B.V1.17, pI.
7:9.
5.111.8.28. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. There is one
row of vertical curls above the forehead. The side-locks
reach the neck and are probably not curled. There are
probably ears. The face is crude.
Context: A194, a large building of the "26th dynasty" city.
The exact locus is unknown.
Note: the head is similar to head no. 29 below.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:15; Holland 1975: AIV.f.2;
Engle 1979: no. 206.
5.111.8.29. A head from Tel Gemmeh. There is one row of
vertical curls above the forehead. The side-locks reach the
neck. The head is similar to head no. 28 (above). According
to Holland, there are incisions on the neck and ears.
Context: A200, the "26th dynasty" city, but the exact location
is unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:18; Holland 1975: Vol. 1:96,
B.IV.f.3, pI. 3:3.
5.111.8.30. A head with a peg from Tel Gemmeh. The
photographs are not good enough to study the small details.
The hair is arranged in side-locks, reaching the shoulders.
Context: BO.198, a long room near a building in the "26th
dynasty" city.
Note: Petrie claimed that this head shows Greek influence
and dated it to ca. 700 BC.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:47; Holland 1975: vol. I:101,
AXll.c.2, pI. 5:2.
5.111.8.31. A head from Tel Erani. It probably has two long
side-locks (oftypes 5.111.5 or 5.111.4).
Context: area A, level 5 or 6 (?). Other details were not
published.
Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: third row, fourth from the left;
Holland 1975: B.VI.6.
5.111.8.32. A head from Tel Shera. It has long vertical curls
above the forehead and long side-locks, descending behind
the ears until the shoulders. The face is fine and well
preserved. It is surrounded by a 'ledge' of clay.
Context: not published.
259
Literature: EAEHL IV:1069, bottom.
5.111.8.33. A head from Tel Erani. It is so damaged that an
exact classification is impossible (follOWing Engle, vs.
Holland). There is an incised line on the forehead.
Literature: Ciacsa 1963: pI. 20:1; Holland 1975: All.d.2;
Engle 1979: type VII:37.
5.111.8.34. A moulded head from Tel el-Ajjul. According to
Holland, it has a large, twisted mouth and a headdress.
Context: unknown.
Place: London?
Note: the head was dated to the Bronze age in the report.
Holland mentioned that a few heads were found in Iron Age
burials at Tel el-'Ajjul.
Literature: Petrie 1931: pI. 24: bottom row, no. 1; Holland
1975: AXll.a.1.
5.111.8.35. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. The hair has incised
circles pattern. The photograph is not very clear. According
himself classified it among the moulded AXil heads.
Context: unknown.
Place: London?
Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.a.2.
5.111.8.36. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. The hair is arranged in
vertical curls (?) and there are no ears. According to Petrie,
it is similar to figurine no. 5.111.8.17 (above). Holland
compared it with a head from Ashkelon (cf. 5.111.8.40 below).
The head from Gileam seems more similar (cf. 5V1.5.3
below).
Context: QA1104, a large open area not well defined, south
of the palace. Petrie dated the Q buildings to the Bronze Age
(dynasty 18).
Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:38; Holland 1975: AXll.m.1.
5.111.8.37. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. There are remains of red
paint. The details in the published drawing are not clear.
Context: FL.973.
Place: London?
Literature: Petrie 1952: pI. 28:7; Holland 1975: AXll.p.1, pI.
5:4.
5.111.8.38. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. It was published by
Holland as a miscellaneous head.
Context: unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXll.p.2, pI. 5:5.
5.111.8.39. A head from Tel el-Ajjul. It is badly preserved, but
has a simple wig (according to Holland).
Context: unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:40; Holland 1975: AXll.p.3.
5.111.8.40. A head from Ashkelon. The published photograph
is so small that the details cannot be seen. According to
Holland, it is a head of a male from the Iron Age I.
Context: unknown.
Place: London?
Literature: Phythian-Adams 1923:80, pI. 2:9; World of the
Bible 1965, PEF Century Exhibition, London: pI. 6b; Holland
1975: vol. 1:57-58,200, AXll.m.2.

5.IV. Hand-made Figurines, Coastal
and Northern Israel
5.1V.1: Fairly Whole Figurines with Pillar
Bodies
5.1V.1.1. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The face is very crude and has a pointed chin (beard?). The
mouth is formed by an applied and incised band of clay. The .
position of the hands is not clear.
Context: CL.192, a badly defined area between two pits of
the Persian period, in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city.
Place: London?
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:14; Holland 1975:103, fig.
16:2, B.l.a.2.
5.1V.1.2. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The body is
hollow, the hands lie under the breasts. The body is female
although the chin is elongated and seems male. The eyes
are applied (?). There is a painted decoration in red, orange
and blue.
Context: height 192", inside a wall, but the exact details are
unknown. Petrie dated this figurine to ca. 950 BC.
Place: London?
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:14; Holland 1975:103, B.l.a.1,
fig. 16:1, pI. 7:1.
[Fig. 8:4].
5.1V.1.3. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The figure holds something, perhaps a drum. The face is
hand-made, fairly similar to the Judean type A1 faces.
There are remains of red and white paint in the eyes. The
body is hollow. Petrie noted that this figurine is unique
among the Tel Gemmeh figurines, but the published
photograph is not good.
Context: HL.183, a room in a large building of Petrie's "20th
dynasty" city. Iron Age I period?
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:3; Holland 1975: vol. 1:208,
B.II.a.1.
5.1V.1.4. A whole figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. It is not clear
whether the body is hollow. The hands are placed on the
chest, but there are probably no breasts. The eyes are
applied (only one eye survived), as well as the ears. Reg. no.
1533.
Note: the head is similar to a head from Gezer, no. 5 below.
Context: not stratified.
Place: Rockefeller 33.4352.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:205, AXIV.c.1, pI. 34:3.
5.1V.1.5. A whole figurine from Gezer. The arms are small
and perhaps extended to the sides. The eyes are applied
(one is missing) as well as the ears. It is not clear if the body
is hollow.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Macalister 1906:105, fig. 35a; Holland 1975:
AI.i.17.
5.1V.1.6. A whole figurine from Gezer. The body is bell-
shaped, but not necessarily hollow. It is red-slipped. The
260
mouth is shown by incision and the eyes by indentations.
The hands are placed horizontally on the chest, but breasts
are not represented.
Context: "fourth Semitic" level.
Place: Rockefeller P.104.
Literature: Gazer II: pI. 221:26a; Pilz 1924: C.A.74; Pritchard
1943: type VII:231; Holland 1975:103, B.l.b.1.
5.1V.1.7. A whole figurine from Megiddo. The body is hollow
and the belly is pierced. There are little stump arms. The
eyes are applied and the hair is indicated by small lumps of
clay.
Context: locus 1674, a fill inside the court of the "stables"
(1576) in square 0/6. The fill included pottery of levels V-IV
and earlier finds.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5401; Holland 1975: B.l.c.1.
5.1V.1.8. A head and an upper body part from Megiddo. The
body is hollow and the navel is indicated (?). The hands hold
a drum perpendicular to the body. The eyes are protruding,
the mouth is incised and the nostrils are pierced. The hair is
formed from lumps of clay.
Context: locus 1501, a room of a court house of level II.
Note: the face may have been moulded.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 24: M.4549; Pritchard 1943: type
VII:195; Holland 1975: B.ll.c.2.
5.1V.2: Peg Figurines
5.1V.2.1. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The arms are
extended to the sides, shaped as stumps (broken?). The
head is pointed and very schematic (or just worn out).
Context: zone 30, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:2; Holland 1975: AXV.b.1.
5.1V.2.2. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The hands are
extended to the sides. There is a representation of the
breasts. The head is similar to the "Ashdoda" heads (type
5.IV.4 below). According to Dothan, it is a figurine of a
wailing woman.
Context: HO.183, an open area in Petrie's "20th dynasty"
city.
Place: The British Museum.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:2; Holland 1975: A.XV.b.3;
Dothan 1982:237ff, fig. 12:1, pI. 26.
5.1V.2.3. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The arms are broken. The head is flattened and incised with
a geometric pattern (before firing?).
Context: unknown.
Place: London?
Literature: Holland 1975: AXV.b.2, pI. 6:10.
5.1V.2.4. A body from Tel Gemmeh. The arms are missing.
Context: unknown.
Place: London?
Literature: Holland 1975: AXV.a.3, pI. 6:9, fig. 15:1.
5.1V.2.5. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The eyes are applied, the mouth and the nostrils are incised.
The photographs do not show the exact nature of this
fragment.
Context: FL.187, a large open area in Petrie's "22nd dynasty"
city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 38:21; Holland 1975: A.XV.a.2, pI.
6:8.
5.1V.2.6. A nearly whole figurine from Lachish (season
1933). The arms are extended (but broken). There is no
representation of breasts. The nose is applied. Reg. no.
1080.
Context: locus 158, level III (?).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1V.2.7. A nearly whole figurine from Lachish. It is made of
very crude clay. The arms are extended (one is missing).
There is no representation of breasts. The nose is applied.
Reg. no. 2020.
Context: locus 154, level III (?).
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1V.2.8. A whole figurine from Tel Gherishe (Grisa). The
arms are placed on the belly, under the breasts. There is an
indication of the fingers. The head is similar to the coastal
type 5.IV.3 (below): it is flattened, with applied disk-eyes and
incised mouth. Reg. no. 6730/1.
Context: locus 1126.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: courtesy of the excavation team.
5.1V.2.9. A body from Azor. The arms are uplifted and there
are small breasts (it may be a wailing woman).
Place: the private collection of Mr. Weisenfreund.
Literature: Dothan 1982: pI. 27.
5.1V.2.10. A nearly whole figurine from Azor. One arms is
placed on the head and the other on the chest. The head is
similar to that of no. 8 above, with applied disk eyes. The
shape is crude.
Note: the body ends in a straight cut, perhaps indicating that
it was part of a vessel rather than a peg figurine.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-361.
Literature: Dothan 1982:246, pI. 25, fig. 12:2.
Note: I have not included further figures of wailing women,
attached to pottery vessels (e.g., Dothan 1982: pis. 23-24,
fig. 10). These belong to Holland's type K (vessels) and are
not free-standing figurines.
5.1V.3: 'Ashdodite' Heads
Note: this type includes hand-made heads, mostly flattened
from above and having applied disk eyes and incised or
applied mouths. It is not clear whether they represent males
of females, and a few are exceptional.
5.1V.3.1. A solid head from Ashdod. The mouth is made of
two applied lumps of clay. Reg. no. 04605/1.
261
Context: locus 1128, an open area of an unclear nature.
Levels 1-2?
Literature: Ashdod II-III: 127, fig. 62:7, pI. 55:5; Holland 1975:
AI.i.6.
5.1V.3.2. A hollow head from Ashdod. The facial features are
painted in black, inclUding the eyes. Reg. no. 04375/1.
Context: locus 1122, a pit in square Ul15, levels 2.
Literature: Ashdod 11-111:127, fig. 62:8, pI. 55:3; Holland 1975:
B.X.a.4.
5.1V.3.3. A head from Ashdod. It is solid, except for a
depression in its center (for inserting a stick?). There is a
ridge along the skull, perhaps a lock of hair. Reg. no.
0380/1.
Context: locus 1019, the floor of a court (?) from level 3.
Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 43:1, pI. 27:4; Holland 1975:
B.X.a.1.
5.1V.3.4. A solid (?) head from Ashdod. Reg. no. C10.
Context: surface find.
Place: probably Romema, IAA no. 63-2515.
Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 47:5, pI. 55:5; Holland 1975:
B.X.a.2.
5.IV.3.5. A solid head from Ashdod. Reg. no. B3.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 26:3, pI. 15:1; Holland 1975: AI.i.3.
[Fig. 8:6].
5.1V.3.6. A solid head with a peg from Ashdod. Reg. no.
0288/1.
Context: locus 1016, an open area in square Al14, levels 3a-
3b.
Note: Holland claimed that this head had a hollow body
because of the peg (and hence all of his type B.X heads).
Yet, a peg exists also with solid-bodied figurines.
Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 43:3, pI. 27:6; EAEHL I (1975):115:
Israel Museum Catalogue no. 68: fig. 82; Dothan 1964: pI.
22e; Holland 1975: B.X.a.3.
[Fig. 8:7].
5.1V.3.7. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. The head is
solid. The body has legs (now broken). There is no indication
of breasts. The hands were extended to the front (?). Reg.
no. 05021/1.
Context: locus 1067, a pit in square Al19, level 2.
Literature: Ashdod 11-111:127, fig. 62:10; Holland 1975:
AXlll.b.2.
5.1V.3.8. A solid head from Ashdod. Reg. no. 04841/1.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:3, pI. 56:3; Holland 1975:
AXlIl.b.3.
5.1V.3.9. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. it is solid and
has legs. The arms were extended to the front (?). The head
is rounded. There is no indication of breasts.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 62:2; Holland 1975: B.X.a.2.
[Fig. 8:8].
5.1V.3.10. A head and an upper body part from Ashdod. T~e
head is solid and has an applied headdress, decorate? With
red and black lines. There are painted points on the chin and
back side. The eyes are impressed. Remains at the Ch~st
suggest breasts. The hands were extended to the front (.).
Reg. no. 04185/1.
Context: locus 1122, a pit in level 2.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:3, pI. 56:2; Holland 1975:
AI.L.1.
5.1V.3.11. A solid head from Ashdod. It is rounded at the top.
Reg. no. D4182/1.
Context: locus 1111, a room in square UT/1, level 3.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:4; Holland 1975: AI.L15.
5.1V.3.12. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. It is solid
and shows a figure playing a lyre. The head is rounded at
the top. There are remains of red slip and black color. The
base is missing. Reg. no. D756/1.
Context: locus 1062, square B/8. It is a Byzantine period
locus, whose nature is unknown.
Note: it may have been part of a cultic stand. The excavators
suggest comparisons with Cyprus and Crete.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 63-92.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: 126f, 133, fig. 62:1, pI. 55:1; Holland
1975: AI.L4; Dothan 1964: pI. 22:f; Israel Museum
Catalogue 84; Dothan 1967:185; Keel 1972: fig. 469; Dothan
1977:38f; Dothan 1982:249, pI. 35; Singer 1990:30; Mitchell
1992: fig. 3.
5.1V.3.13. A solid head from Ashdod. The upper part is
rounded. Crude workmanship and traces of white-wash.
Reg. no. A618/6.
Context: a balk, unclear nature of context.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 63-2428.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 7:17; Holland 1975: AI.L7.
5.1V.3.14. A solid head from Ashdod. It has a hat, flattened
at the top. Reg. no. D1894/6.
Context: locus 1155, an open area in square 0/4, without
clear context.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:5, pI. 55:4; Holland 1975:
AI.L19.
5.1V.3.15. A solid head from Ashdod. It is rounded and has
very large, applied eyes. Reg. no. D4188/1.
Context: locus 1116, an area of unclear function and date
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:6, pI. 55:2; Holland 1f~75:
AI.i.10.
5.1V.3.16. A solid head from Ashdod. It is rounded at the top.
Reg. no. D5040/1.
Context: locus 1067, a pit in square A/19, level 2.
Place: Romema 1M no. 63-2404.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 62:9; Holland 1975: AI.L11.
5.1y.3.17. A solid head from Gezer. It is flattened at the top.
!t .I~ shaped as a long wedge, either indicating a peg for
JOIning to the body, or a peg-figurine. The mouth is incised
and the eyes are made of applied disks of clay.
Context: zone 3D, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:12; Holland 1975: AI.L16.
5.1V.3.1.8. A solid head from Lachish, probably with a peg.
The facial features are similar to other heads of type 5.IV.3,
but the excavators believed that this fragment was attached
to a pottery ves~el. They stated that it is very different from
the commo~ pillar-figurines. It is interesting that it was
compared With figurines from Ayia-lrinL Reg. no. 6252.
Con~ext: locus K15.1033, the court of the palace, but this is
a mixed assemblage of levels V-II (i.e., all the Iron Age II)
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:16. . settlement.
5.1V.3.19. A solid head from Ekron. It is flattened at the top.
Context: surface find.
262
Literature: Naveh 1958:99, no. 2, pI. 21c-d; Holland 1975:
Al.i.24.
5.1V.3.20..A so.lid head from Azeka. It is flattened at the top.
The nose IS a little damaged. Height 48 mm. Red clay.
Context: surface find, from the eastern slope of the site.
Place: private collection.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of D. Amit.
5.1V.3.21. A nearly whole figurine from Maresha. It shows a
male with a flattened "Ashdodite" head, applied disk eyes
and applied ears. The nostrils are incised. The arms are
extended sideways.
Context: cave 75, locus 1386xv68 (cf. app. 2: no. 472
above).
Literature: Kloner 1992:72, upper.
[Fig. 8:5].
5.1V.4: "Ashdoda" Figurines
5.1V.3.16. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. This is the
famous "Ashdoda": a woman whose body forms a stool or a
bed with four legs. It is solid and hand-made. The head is
made as a cylinder, flattened at the top. The eyes and the
ears are applied to it, as well as the little breasts. The
decoration is similar to that of Philistine Iron Age pottery in
general - red and black paint on white background. There is
a necklace with a pendant.
Context: a house in level XII, Iron Age I.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 68-1094.
Literature: Ashdod 11-111:129, fig. 91:1, pI. 82; Holland 1975:
K.6?; Dothan 1982:234f, fig. 9, pI. 19:1; EAEHL Hebrew I:
18, upper left.
[Fig. 8:9].
5.1V.4.2. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Ashdod. It is rounded
at the top. Reg. no. A1752/2.
Context: square J7.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 7:20; Holland 1975:?
5.1V.4.3. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Ashdod. It is rounded
at the top. Reg. no. A986/1.
Context: square E5. Place: Romema 1M no. 63-2416.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 7:21; Holland 1975: AI.L8.
5.1V.4.4. A solid "Ashdoda" head and upper body from
Ashdod. It is rounded at the top, red slipped and painted with
black. There is no sign of breasts. Reg. no. S.50.
Context: surface find.
Note: Holland thought that it is a peg figurine, but the lower
body is missing and it looks more like an "Ashdoda" head.
Literature: Ashdod 11-111:131, fig. 65:10; Holland 1975:
AXV.a.1.
5.1V.4.5. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Ekron. It may also be
a head oftype 5.IV.3 figurines.
Context: the area of the kiln, level VIII, Iron Age I.
Literature: Gitin and Dothan 1987:203, up center.
5.1V.4.6. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Ashdod. It is concave
at the top.
Context: not clear.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 68-1139.
Literature: Dothan 1982: pI. 19:1.
5.1V.4.7. A solid "Ashdoda" head from Jerusalem. It is large
and flattened at the top. The eyes are made of applied disks.
Reg. no. D13251 (season 1982).
Context: not yet published.
Place: Terra Santa, Jerusalem.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.1V.5: Various Hand-made Figurines
5.1V.5.1. A head and upper body part from Beth Shean.
There are little stump hands and the figurine is red slipped.
The published photograph does not permit a close study.
Reg. no. P32-15-199.
Context: locus 1564, building E north, upper level V (ca. 10th
century BC).
Literature: James 1966: fig. 112:2.
5.1V.5.2. A head with a peg from Gezer. The mouth is open
and the eyes are depressed.
Context: zone 9, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:11; Holland 1975: AI. k.1.
5.1V.5.3. A head from Gezer. It has a ridge (of hair?)
descending down, nearly to the lower part of the neck. It is
incised horizontally. The eyes are made of applied disks and
the mouth is incised.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:6; Holland 1975: AI.L.3.
5.1V.5.4. A hollow head from Gezer. It is unique, with a
beard. Part of the head is missing.
Context: zone 10, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 382:5; Holland 1975: B.IIl.b.1.
5.1V.5.5. A head from Gezer. It is rounded and strange.
Macalister thought that it represented a monkey. There are
applied and incised features.
Note: cf. Romema, 1M no. 74-709 (?).
Context: unknown.
Literature: Gezer II: pI. 125:23a; Holland 1975: AXVII.a.3.
5.1V.5.6. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The head
seems to belong to type 5.IV.3. The body is female, with the
hands crossed on the lower belly. The legs are separated.
Context: zone 8, the ''third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer 11:419, pI. 221:31; Holland 1975: AXlll.a.3.
5.1V.5.7. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The head is
rounded, with an incised mouth and impressed eyes. There
is an indication of a male organ (?) and small stump-arms.
The legs are separated.
Context: zone 29, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 282:4; Holland 1975: AXlIl.b.9.
5.1V.5.8. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. It is very crude
and has separated legs.
Context: zone 3D, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezerll: fig. 382:3; Holland 1975: AXlIl.c.4.
5.1V.5.9. A head and an upper body part from Kh. Sit Laila.
Stump arms (broken). The head is rounded and has an
incised mouth and impressed eyes. The ears are
represented.
Note: cf. a figurine from 'Afulah, 'Atiqot 1, fig. 15:19, and
from Gezer, Holland A.I.L17.
Context: surface find, probably from the Iron Age I
Literature: Aharoni 1959:114, fig. 1, pI. 14a; Holland 1975:
Al.j.7.
263
5.1V.5.10. A nearly whole figurine from Megiddo. It has legs,
but the arms are broken. The head is rounded.
Context: square 019, an unstratified area on the slope.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 30:M.1824; Holland 1975:
AXIII.a.7.
5.1V.5.11. A head from Megiddo. It has a horizontal band on
the forehead. The mouth is incised.
Context:Schumacher's "Tempelburg", group 3.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 39:c; Holland 1975:
Al.j.11.
5.1V.5.12. A head from Megiddo. It is a male (?) with a peg
and large ears. It has a pointed nose, applied disk-eyes and
an applied and incised mouth. There is an applied band on
the forehead, which is incised.
Context: locus 1508, level III.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 33:M.4453; Holland 1975: B.IIl.a.2.
5.1V.5.13. A head from Megiddo, similar to no. 12 above but
painted red. It is a male with a pointed nose, applied disk-
eyes and large ears. The mouth is applied and incised.
There is an applied band on the forehead.
Context: locus 1423, a room in a building of level III.
Place: Rokefeller 36.943.
Note: for a similar head from Samaria cf. no. 19 below.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 33:M.4334; Holland 1975: B.III.a.1.
5.1V.5.14. A head and upper body part from Megiddo. It has
a rounded head with an incised mouth and impressed eyes.
The arms are broken.
Context: P6, under floor 555. It is from the slope of the site,
perhaps level II (but actually not stratified).
Literature: May 1935: pI. 29:M.2060; Holland 1975: Al.j.10.
5.1V.5.15. A head from Mefalsim. It has applied eyes inside
hand-made depressions. There is a suggestion of a beard
(?). The upper part of the head is pointed.
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.1V.5.16. A head from Samaria. It has applied disk eyes
and a strange ''tasseled'' headdress (also applied).
Literature: Holland 1975: AI.i.25, fig. 5:1.
5.1V.5.17. A head from Samaria. It has a beard, applied ears
and disk-eyes and perhaps a conical hat. Reg. no. C.555
(probably).
Context: locus E207 (according to the card in Rockefeller).
Literature: Samaria III: cat. no. 23; Holland 1975: AI.L26,
fig. 5:1.
5.1V.5.18. A head with a peg from Samaria.
Place: Jerusalem University, no. 3447.
Literature: Holland 1975: AI.L26a, addenda, pI. 41:4.
5.1V.5.19. A head from Samaria. It is similar to heads no.
12-13 above. Reg. no. C.1304.
Context: E207.
Place: Rockefeller 3224.
Note: perhaps heads nos. 12-13, 19, are rider's heads.
Literature: Samaria III: pI. 11:5; Holland 1975: B.lIl.a.3.
5.1V.5.20. A nearly whole figurine from Tel ez-Zuweid. It has
a pillar body, pointed head and applied disk eyes.
Context: JR.353, Le., phase J (dated to the 9th century BC
by the excavator).
Literature: Petrie 1937:11, pI. 30:6; Holland 1975: AI. i.28.
5.1V.5.21. A whole figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. It has a crescent
base, similar to that of some rider figurines, and little stump
arms. The head is rounded.
Context: EAD.185, a large court.
Literature: Petrie 1934:10 pI. 24; Pritchard 1943: VII:229?;
Holland 1975: A.XIII.c.1.
5.1V.5.22. A nearly whole figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. It has
small legs and stump arms. The head is rounded. The facial
features are not clear.
Context: LB.1030, dated by Petrie to the Iron Age I.
Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 40; Holland 1975: AXIII.c.2.
5.IV.5.23. A head and an upper body part from Tel Asor. It is
similar to the 5.IV.3 heads, but has a short bread decorated
with incised lines. The body is hollow.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Giveon 1967:121, pI. 10:4-5; Holland 1975:
B.ll.c.3.
5.1V.5.24. A head and an upper body part from Tel
Gemmeh. It has a solid pillar body with the hands under the
breasts. The head is rounded and has an applied hat.
Note: the shape of the head is close to the JPF, but the nose
is different and there are indented details.
Context: AZ.195, a silo fom the Persian period.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:16; Holland 1975: AI. b.1, pI.
1:4.
5.1V.5.25. A head from Tel Gemmeh. It is probably similar to
the 5.IV.3 heads, but the published photographs are not very
clear.
Context: height 196, but the location is unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:17; Holland 1975: AI.i.19, pI.
1:11.
5.IV.5.26. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. It depicts a
figure sitting in a chariot, very crudely made. The body is
solid. The head is similar to the 5.IV.3 heads, with a pointed
beard.
Context: FJ.188, an area of unclear function in Petrie's "22nd
dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928:18, pI. 39:14; Holland 1975: Al.i.20.
5.1V.5.27. A head from Tel Gemmeh. It is very crude. There
are applied disk eyes with incised pupils. The nose is also
applied.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:20; Holland 1975: AI.i.18.
5.1V.5.28. A head and an upper body part from Tel
Gemmeh. The figurine held an object (a child or a vessel?).
The head is flattened and the eyes are applied and incised.
The body is solid.
Context: CW.193, a room (?) in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928:18, pI. 36:13; Holland 1975: Al.k.2,
pI. 2:3, fig. 5:8.
5.1V.5.29. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The body is solid. The head has a large beard.
Note: this may be a figurine from the Persian period.
Context: unknown.
Place: Rockefeller 1703 (?).
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:7; Holland 1975: Al.k.3.
5.IV.5.30. A head from Tel Gemmeh. It is probably similar to
the 5.IV.3 heads. The top is flattened.
Context: DR.192, probably an open area in Petrie's "23rd
dynasty" city.
264
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:11; Holland 1975: AI.L.4, pI.
2:4.
5.IV.5.31. A head from Tel Gemmeh. It is very crude,
perhaps similar to the 5.IV.3 heads. The eyes are applied
and incised, and the ears are pinched by hand.
Context: KA.177, an open area in Petrie's "18th dynasty"
city.
Literature: Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:17; Holland 1975:
AI.i.19, pI. 1:11.
5.IV.5.32. A head from Tel Zeror. It is very crude and
peculiar, with disk eyes and a unique headdress. It is not
similar to the other heads of type 5.IV.5. Reg. no. 6518.
Context: surface find from area B.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 66-359.
Literature: Ohata 1967: pl. 47:4; Holland 1975: AI.i.27, pI.
1:11.
5.IV.5.33. A head from Tel Erani. It is solid, rounded, and
simple, except a peculiar horizontal protrusion.
Context: area A, levels V-IV.
Literature: Yeivin 1961: pI. 2: third row, no. 5; Holland 1975:
AXVll.a.2.
5.1V.5.34. A nearly whole figurine from Tel el-Far'ah (south).
There are legs. The head is similar to the 5.IV.3 heads;
flattened from above, with applied and incised eyes.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.b.7, pI. 6:2.
5.IV.5.35. A whole male figurine from Ekron. The head is
flattened. The arms are extended to the sides.
Context: level VII, the area of the kiln, Iron Age I period.
Note: it may be a wailing figure, cf. figurines 5.IV.2.8,
5.IV.2.10 (above).
Literature: Gitin and Dothan 1987:203, up center.
5.IV.5.36. A hand-made head from Dor. It is probably a
male. Further details are not yet published, other than a
general dating to the Iron Age.
Literature: Stern 1992: photograph no. 70.
5.IV.5.37. A head from Dan. There are side-locks, but no
curls. It is probably hand-made. The right side is damaged.
The head is a little similar to heads of type 5.VI.1 (below).
The eyes are enhanced by painted circles.
Context: level V, area e, Iron Age I.
Literature: Biran 1992:127, 132 photograph 102.
5.IV.5.38. A hand-made head and upper body part from Tel
Gemmeh. There were V-shaped legs (now missing). The
arms are extended forward. There is no sign of breasts. The
mouth is incised.
Note: it may be a rider's figurine.
Context: CK.192, a room in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.b.3.
5.IV.5.39. A hand-made head and upper body part from
'Afulah. It is similar to figurine no. 9 above. There are
crossed bands of red paint on the chest and perhaps an
indication of a beard. The eyes are applied. Reg. no.
A175212.
Context: near installation XXIX, level III (?), Iron Age I
period.
Literature: Dothan, M. 1956:36-37, fig. 15:19, pI. 6:1;
Holland 1975:42f, AI.i.2.
5.IV.5.40. A hand-made head from Tel es-Safi. It has applied
eyes and ears. The mouth is incised. The hair is made of two
tassels of clay, also incised.
Context: not clear.
Note: the head is similar to heads of type 5.IV.3 (above).
Place: Romema, IAA no. 64-362.
Literature: Dothan 1982:227f, pI. 12.
5.IV.5.41. A hand-made head from Beth-Shean. It has
rounded curls of hair. Iron Age I period.
Literature: Mazar, A 1994. Had. Arch. 101-102:31.
5.1V.6: Hollow Body Parts
(of Figurine Types 5.111 - 5.1V)
5.IV.6.1. A fragment from Ashdod. It shows one hand placed
on the right breast. Reg. no. A618/19.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 7:16; Holland 1975: B.X.b.1.
5.IV.6.2. A fragment from Kh. Hoga. It is probably hollow.
There is one hand placed under something (a breast?). It is
similar to no. 3 below. Negative no. 38409.
Context: surface find.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of R. Gophna.
5.IV.6.3. A hollow (?) fragment from Tel Haror. The arms are
placed underneath the breasts. It is similar to no. 2 above.
Context: level G.3, 7th century BC.
Literature: Oren 1991:17.
5.IV.6.4. A fragment from Tel el-Ajjul. It shows a part of the
peg.
Context: unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.IX.1, pI. 9:1.
5.IV.6.5. A fragment from Tel Gemmeh. It shows a part of
the peg.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:7; Holland 1975: B.IX.2.
5.IV.6.6. A fragment from Tel Gemmeh. It shows hands and
breasts.
Context: FH.189, an area not well defined in Petrie's "22nd
dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:19; Holland 1975: B.VI1.4, fig.
17:3, pI. 8:7.
5.IV.6.7. A fragment from Tel Gemmeh. The hands grasped
the breasts (now broken).
Context: EF.190, a large open area in Petrie's "22nd
dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:22; Holland 1975: B.VI1.5, fig.
17:4, pI. 8:8.
5.IV.6.8. A fragment from Tel Gemmeh. Only one arm
survived, holding a breast.
Context: BM.197, a large room (or a court) of a building in
Petrie's "26th dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:45; Holland 1975: B.VI1.6, pI.
8:9.
5.IV.6.9. A fragment from Megiddo. It is hollow and wheel-
made. There are little hands holding the inner part of the
breasts. The body is similar to that of the musician from
265
Megiddo, figurine 5.IV.1.8 (above). It is narrow, cylindrical
and has a protrusion in its middle.
Context: locus 1431 in square R5, a room in an 'Assyarian'
court house. Level III.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 24:M.4385; Pritchard 1943: type
VII:198; Holland 1975: ax.e.z
5.IV.6.10. A fragment from Tel el-Far'ah (north). The hands
are placed on the chest. Reg. no. F.1983.EBAF.
Context: trench II, level 7b under floor 141 in house 187.
11th-10th centuries BC.
Literature: De Vaux 1951: pI. 17:1, left; Chambon 1984: fig.
63:5; Holland 1975: B.VI1.1.
5.IV.6.11. A fragment from Ta'anakh. One hand lies along
the body, the other is uplifted (?). The body is female.
Context: unknown, probably from the excavations of Lapp.
Place: ASOR collection, Jerusalem.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.V11.13, fig. 18:3.
5.IV.6.12. A fragment from Ta'anakh. The hands hold the
breasts (now broken).
Context: unknown, probably from the excavations of P.
Lapp.
Place: ASOR collection, Jerusalem.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VI1.14, addenda, fig. 76:1.
5.IV.6.13. A fragment from Ta'anakh. The hands are placed
on the belly. It is a female figure holding a child (?).
Context: room B, perhaps part of a tomb. According to
Sellin, this locus is related to the public "palace" of the
Bronze Age.
Literature: Sellin 1904:40, fig. 37; Vincent 1907:159f, fig.
101; Pilz 1924: type F:98; Pritcahrd 1943: type Vlb:183;
Holland 1975: BVIII.7.
5.IV.6.14. A fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-made and
hollow. The female figure holds a drum. There are some
remains of red slip.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VIII.5, pI. 18:8.
5.IV.6.15. A fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-made and
hollow. The left hand holds a drum (?), the right hand is
missing. There are remains of red paint.
Note: following Holland's description, this is probably a
figurine mentioned in the report as T61 from the TO area
(Samaria III: cat. no. 21).
Literature: Holland 1975: B.V1I1.4, pI. 18:7.
5.IV.6.16. A fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-made and
hollow. The female figure holds a drum.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.V1I1.3, pI. 18:6.
5.IV.6.17. A female body from Samaria. it is wheel-made
and hollow. The hands hold a child or a musical instrument
(?), but not a drum. There is a red slip.
Place: Rockefeller 32.2428.
Note: following the museum card, the figurine was found in
locus E207 and its reg. no. is C.592.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII1.2, pI. 18:2.
5.IV.6.18. A female fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-
made and hollow. There are small breasts. The hands
probably hold an object (a child or a musical instrument?).
Thin red slip. Reg. no. C.100b?
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VIII.1, fig. 18:4.
5.1V.6.19. A female fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-
made and hollow, but broken lengthwise. The left hand is
placed on the chest.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3443.
Note: the collection card gives the reg. no. as C.583.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII1.12.a, pI. 44:3.
5.1V.6.20. A female fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-
made and hollow, but broken lengthwise. The left hand is
placed on the chest and is incised. Dark red slip.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3444.
Note: the collection card gives the reg. no. as. C.584.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VIII.12.b, pI. 44:4.
5.1V.6.21. A female fragment from Samaria. It is wheel-
made and hollow. The hands held a drum.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3445.
Note: the collection card gives the reg. no. as C.629.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.VII1.6, pI. 45:1.
5.1V.6.22. A solid body fragment from Hazor. It is wheel-
made and covered with black-brown paint. Reg. no. 1267/1b.
Context: locus 3132a, a room at the corner of a building near
the citadel. Level Va, 8th century BC.
Literature: Hazor II: pI. 103:5; Holland 1975: B.VII.3, pI. 44:3.
5.1V.6.23. A female fragment from Tel Zeror. It is probably
hollow. The lower body is a pillar, painted with geometric
patterns in pink. The hands are placed under the breasts.
Yellow-brown clay. Reg. no. 461/1.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 65-355.
Note: according to the card at Romema, the base is hollow.
Context: trenches S-R, a mixed assemblage of Iron Age
through Arabian periods.
Literature: Ohata 1967:10; Holland 1975: AX1.58, pI. 4:5,
fig. 10:7.
5.1V.7: Solid Body Parts
(of Figurine Types 5.111 - 5.1V)
5.1V.7.1. A female body from Beth Shean. The hands are
broken, but the right one was uplifted and the other placed
along the body (?). Orange slip. Reg. no. P31-50-107.
Context: locus 1527, part of houses B7 in lower level V. Iron
Age I period.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 111:2; Holland 1975: A.XI.6.
5.1V.7.2. A female body from Beth Shean. The hands are
placed on the belly, with an indication of the fingers. Yellow
clay. Reg. no. P32-15-200.
Context: locus 1350, an area which is not well-defined near
the gate.
Lower level V, Iron Age I period.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 111:3; Holland 1975: AX.d.1.
5.1V.7.3. A female body from Beth Shean. The right hand
lies below the breast, the left hand on the belly. The
published photograph is not very clear. Reg. no. P32-15-
201.
Context: under locus 1549, whose nature is not clear. Lower
level V, Iron Age I period.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 112:6; Holland 1975: A.X.d.2.
5.1V.7.4. A female body from Beth Shean. The hands
support small breasts.
Context: exact details unknown; the end of the Late Bronze
Age level.
266
Note: the shape and the date fit a plaque figurine, which is
probably what the fragment is (cf. Rowe 1940: fig. 107:7,
against the classification of Holland).
Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 45a:5; Pritchard 1943: type
VII:190; Holland 1975: AX.a.1.
5.1V.7.5. A female body from Beth Shean. The right hand is
placed on one breast, the left underneath the other breast.
Orange-yellow slip. Reg. no. P29-103-875.
Context: locus 281, level IV, ca. 9th century BC.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:5; Holland 1975: AX.a.2.
5.1V.7.6. A female body from Gezer. The hands are broken.
there is no clear sign of breasts, but a necklace is painted in
black color.
Context: zone 8, Macalister's "third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:29; Pilz 1924: Cb:77; Pritchard
1943: Vllla:282; Holland 1975: AX.h.3.
5.1V.7.7. A female body from Gezer. The hands lie on the
chest, with indication of the fingers. The breasts are small.
The sexual organ is marked, and there is a crescent-shaped
necklace. Red slip.
Context: unstratified.
Literature: Gezer 111:418, pI. 221:26; Pritchard 1943: type
VI11:227; Holland 1975: AX.h.2.
5.1V.7.8. A female pillar body from Gezer. The hands look
like wings alongside the body.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:24; Pilz 1924: Cc:78; Pritchard
1943: type VIII:217; Holland 1975: AX.f.1.
5.1V.7.9. A female pillar body from Gezer. The hands were
probably extended to the sides (now broken). The breasts
are small and the base has a pronounced ridge.
Note: this body is similar to those of Mycenaean figurines.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Gezer III: pl. 221:13; Pilz 1924: Cb:76; Pritchard
1943: type VIII:226; Holland 1975: AX1.11.
5.1V.7.10. A female pillar body from Gezer. The hands are
broken. There is a protruding belly.
Context: a grave or a cistern in zone 8, Iron Age II period.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 18:2; Pilz 1924: Cb:75; Pritchard
1943: type VIII:209; Holland 1975: AX1.12.
5.1V.7.11. A female body from Megiddo. There are small
breasts, but no remains of hands and arms. Traces of red-
burnished slip. Reg. no. M.3991.
Context: grave (?) 64 in square ST/18, Iron Age II period.
Literature: Guy 1938: pI. 171:4; Holland 1975: AX1.46.
5.IV.7.12. A female body from Megiddo. The left hand is
placed on the breast. There is an .indication of the fingers.
Reg. no. C.590.
Context: square N/12, the "stables" areaIthe exact locus is
unknown).
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:19; Holland 1975: AX.a.9.
5.1V.7.13. A female body from Megiddo. The hands cover
the breasts. There is an indication of fingers and bracelets.
Painted lines on the belly mark a dress (perhaps). Reg. no.
M.1071.
Context: Schumacher's trench, unstratified.
Place: Rockefeller 34.1477.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 29:M.1071; Pritchard 1943: type
VII:224; Holland 1975: A.X.a.6.
5.1V.7.14. A female body from Megiddo. The hands are
extended to the sides. There is no indication of breasts. The
figure wears a necklace with a rounded pendant.
Context: locus 1674, a mixed fill of levels V-IV in the court of
the southern stables.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5393; Holland 1975: AX.hA.
5.1V.7.15. A body from Megiddo. The photograph does not
permit an exact classification. There is perhaps a
suspension hole.
Context: a room in the north-eastern part of Schumacher's
"palace", level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: abb. 79:d; Holland 1975:
AX1.45.
5.1V.7.16. A female body from Megiddo. One arm survived,
placed on the chest. The body is long and thin.
Note: Holland classified this fragment with other JPF, but it
is too fragmented for an exact classification.
Context: a room in the north-eastern part of Schumacher's
"palace", level V.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: abb. 149:c; Holland 1975:
AX.a.8.
5.1V.7.17. A female body from Samaria. The hands are
placed on the abdomen.
Context: area QE, unstratified.
Place: Harvard.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX.e.1, fig. 10:1.
5.1V.7.18. A female body from Samaria. The hands are
placed along the body. There is a yellow slip and a necklace
of indented holes, painted yellow. Reg. no. C.1224.
Context: E207.
Note: From the description given by Holland, this fragment
can be identified in the Samaria report (mentioned only in
the text there).
Literature: Holland 1975: A.X.f.3, fig. 10:2; Samaria 1:80,
catalogue no. 20.
5.1V.7.19. A female body from Samaria. The hands probably
held an object. There is a depiction of legs, and perhaps of a
dress on the pillar body. Red slip.
Context: unknown.
Place: Rockefeller (?).
Literature: Holland 1975: AX.gA, fig. 10:3, pI. 42:4.
5.1V.7.20. A female body from Samaria. The hands are
placed under the breasts. There are remains of two side-
locks of hair on the shoulders. Reg. no. 2189.
Context: zone S.3 west, section A, a mixed assemblage.
Note: Holland classified this fragment like the JPF, but it is
different. The excavators thought that it may belong to the
Hellenistic period.
Literature: Samaria 1:384-5, pI. 75g; Holland 1975: AX.a.11.
5.1V.7.21. A female body from Samaria. It is too small for an
exact classification.
Context: unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXI.57, fig. 12:7.
5.IV.7.22. A pillar body from Samaria. There is no sign of
breasts, but remains of the hands (?) in the upper part of the
fragment.
Context: unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXI.56, fig. 12:6.
267
5.1V.7.23. A body from Samaria. The left hand is placed on
the belly, the right hand on the chest (now broken). Red slip.
Context: unknown.
Place: Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3488.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX.d.3, pI. 42:1.
5.1V.7.24. A body from Samaria. The hands hold an object.
The lower body is pillar shaped and partially hollow. Red
slip.
Context: unknown.
Place: Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 3442.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX.g.5a, addenda, pI. 42:2.
5.1V.7.25. A body from Tel el-Far'ah (south). It is perhaps a
male figure. There are red painted bands on the neck and a
necklace.
Context: WV building, the exact locus is unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:88-89, AX.h.1, pI. 4:3.
5.1V.7.26. A female body from Tel el-Far'ah (south). It has
the remains of white-wash and red painted bands on the
back. The hands are both uplifted, like the Mycenaean
figurines.
Context: UP.374, which is probably mistaken; perhaps
VP.374 (Holland 1975: vol. 1:89).
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: AX. i.1, pI. 4:4.
5.1V.7.27. A female body from Tel Gemmeh. The arms were
extended sideways, or to the front. There is a pillar base.
Context: unknown.
Place: London?
Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.14, pI. 4:5, fig. 10:7.
5.1V.7.28. A male (?) body from Tel Gemmeh. The left arm
is placed on the belly, and there is a sign of the right arm
there as well (but now broken away).
Context: unknown.
Place: London?
Literature: Holland 1975: AX1.15, pI. 4:6.
5.1V.8: Miscellaneous fragments
5.1V.8.1. A fragment of a hollow, cylindrical base from Beth
Shean. Its nature is not clear. Reg. no. 25-9-522.
Context: room 1021a, level V, but a very disturbed area.
Literature: Fitzgerald 1930: pI. 48:27; Holland 1975: AX1.17.
5.1V.8.2. A fragment of a body with legs from Gezer.
Context: unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.b.2, pI. 6:6.
5.1V.8.3. A fragment of a body with legs from Gezer. The
arms are uplifted.
Context: unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.a.4, pI. 5:7.
5.1V.8.4. A fragment of a body with legs from Beth Shean.
Reg. no. 26-11-337.
Context: locus 1126, lower level V.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 108:2; Holland 1975: AXlIl.c.3.
5.1V.8.5. A fragment of a body with legs from Hazor. There is
no indication of breasts. Reg. no. B2I971.
Context: locus 3116a, a passage between the citadel and a
building east of it. Level Va.
Literature: Hazor II: pis. 163:6, 103:2; Holland 1975: AX1.13.
5.1V.8.6. A fragment of a sitting figure with legs from Hazor.
There are small arms alongside the body. Reg. no. 971/1.
Context: locus 3116a, cf. figurine no. 5 above. Level Va.
Literature: Hazor II: pis. 163:7, 103:4; Holland 1975:
AXIV.b.2.
5.1V.8.7. A fragment of a crude body with legs from
Megiddo. Applied lumps of clay indicate the breasts and
perhaps the belly.
Context: the area of tomb F; an exact locus was not defined.
Literature: Schumacher 1908:63, abb. 78; Holland 1975:
AXlIl.c.6.
5.1V.8.8. A fragment of a female body from Samaria. The
right hand is placed diagonally on the belly. Purple-brown
paint. Holland thought that it is a sitting figure.
Context: unknown.
Place: London?
Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.c.3, pI. 14:10.
5.1V.8.9. A fragment of a female body with legs from Tel
Gemmeh. It is incised (perhaps these are potter's marks).
Context: unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXIII.a.5, fig. 14:3, pI. 5:8.
5.1V.8.10. A fragment of a female body with legs from Tel
Gemmeh. The arms are extended (to the sides?) and there
is an indication of the sexual organ by indentation.
Context: HN.183, Petrie's "20th dynasty" city. According to
Kenyon, it is phase Va of the 10th century BC.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.a.6, fig. 14:4, pl. 6:1.
5.1V.8.11. A fragment of a female body with protruding belly,
probably from Tel Gemmeh. There were probably legs, now
missing.
Context: unknown.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXIV.a.1, fig. 14:7, pI. 6:5.
5.V. Iron Age Plaque Figurines
5.V.1: Female Plaque Figurines, Holding a
Disk of Clay (Drum)
5.V.1.1. A body from Irbid (Transjordan). The head and the
base are missing.
Context: grave A, 10th-9th centuries BC. The exact position
of the figurine inside the grave is unknown.
Note: Holland classified this fragment as a pillar body, but
there is no proof for this. The comparisons made by the
excavator, Dajani, indicate that it is a plaque figurine.
Literature: Dajani 1966: pI. 33:16; Holland 1975: vol. 1:196,
A.X.g.3; Dornemann 1983:130, ia:16; Beck 1991: note 3.
5.V.1.2. A head and upper body part from el-Meshed (near
Nebo).
Context: surface find.
Notes: Glueck though that it is a male (1934:27), later a
goddes~ holding a loaf of bread (1945:153). There are no
decorations - perhaps because of the bad preservation state.
Cf. figurines nos. 8, 30, 36 below.
268
Literature: Glueck 1934: fig. 8; Glueck 1945: fig. 82; Holland
1975: C.Vl.a.22; Grohman 1962:419, fig. 63.
[Fig. 11:1].
5.V.1.3. A nearly whole figurine from Beth Shean. Reg. no.
30-12-84.
Context: near 1549, level V, Iron Age I or 10th century BC.
Place: Rockefeller, i.9684.
Literature: Glueck 1945: fig. 83:right; James 1966: fig.
112:5; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.3; Beck 1991: note 4:3, fig. 3
5.V.1.4. A head and an upper body part from Beth Shean.
Reg. no. 25-9-336.
Context: locus 1350, lower level V, ca. 11th century BC.
Literature: Rowe 1945: pI. 44a:2 upper, pI. 35:19; Pritchard
1943: type V:172; James 1966: fig. 111:4; Holland 1975:
C.Vl.a.4; Beck 1991: note 3:3.
5.V.1.5. A body fragment from Beth Shean. Reg. no. 25-9-
595. P29-103-883.
Context: locus 1024, north temple, lower level V, ca. 11th
century BC.
Literature: Rowe 1945: pI. 44a:2 left; Pritchard 1943: type
V:171; James 1966: fig. 111:1; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.5; Beck
1991: note 3:5, fig. 5.
5.V.1.6. A body fragment from Gezer. It portrays a pregnant
female, naked (unlike most of the other examples of type
5.V.1).
Context: Macalister's "third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer 11:414; Gezer III: pI. 221:2; Pilz 1924: E96,
fig. 22; Pritchard 1943: type V:160; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.9;
Beck 1991: note 3:21.
5.V.1.7. A head and upper body part from Gezer.
Context: Macalister's ''third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 499; Pilz 1924: E95; Pritchard 1943:
type V:161; Amiran 1967; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.10; Beck
1991: note 3:20.
[Fig. 11:2].
5.V.1.8. A head and upper body part from Dibon.
Context: area L, but the exact location was not defined.
Note: there are no decorations or breasts (cf. no. 2 above).
Literature: Morton 1989:321, fig. 15.
5.V.1.9. A body fragment from Dalhamiyah (excavations of
N. Zori). Reg. no. 2170.
Context: square 1, Iron Age I period.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 69-1538.
Literature: Beck 1991: note 3:6, fig. 6.
5.V.1.10. A head and upper body part from Hazor. Reg. no.
410/1.
Context: area A, locus 159. It is part of street 174, between
the wall and the houses. Level VIII, ca. 9th century BC.
Literature: Hazor II: pis. 76:12, 163:2; Amiran 1967: note 3;
Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.12; Beck 1991: note 3:2.
5.V.1.11. A body fragment from Hazor. Reg. no. 1830/1.
Context: area A, locus 159b. It is a large open area within
the city walls. Level X, ca. 10th century BC.
Note: the disk is decorated, but the drawing in the report is
not very good.
Literature: Hazor II: pis. 76:13, 163:1; Amiran 1967: note 3;
Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.11; Beck 1991: note 3:1.
5.V.1.12. A body fragment from Heshbon. Height 52 mm.
Context: "phase 194".
Place: Amman.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 88, pI. 16:3, type 2.d.4.
5.V.1.13. A whole body from Megiddo.
Context: a grave from level II.
Note: Pilz dated it to ca. 1500 BC.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: fig. 71; Pilz 1924: E94;
Pritchard 1943: type V:159; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.17; Beck
1991: note 3:9, fig. 4.
5.V.1.14. A whole figurine from Megiddo.
Context: room 37 south of the "temple", level V.
Literature: May 1935:149, pI. 27:M.65; Pritchard 1943: type
V:164, fig. 15; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.20; Beck 1991: note
3:10.
5.V.1.15. A head and an upper body part from Megiddo.
Context: square 0/14, the "temple" area, level IV. Possibly
from room 286.
Place: Rockefeller 36.926.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.1138; Pritchard 1943: type
V:165; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.19; Beck 1991: note 3:12.
5.V.1.16. A whole body from Megiddo.
Context: square R/9, under locus 1693; a paved court under
palace 1723. Level V, ca. 11th century BC.
Place: Rockefeller 36.958.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5418; Pritchard 1943: type
V:168, fig. 15; Holland 1975: C.V.b.21; Beck 1991: note
3:15.
5.V.1.17. A whole figurine from Megiddo.
Context: area N/12, in Schumacher's trench. It may have
belonged to level V (of the American excavations), by
analogy with figurine no. 16 (above).
Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.810; Pritchard 1943: type
V:169; Holland 1975: C.V.b.18; Beck 1991: note 3:11.
5.V.1.18. A head and upper body part Megiddo.
Context: room 1004 in a building of level II, 7th century BC.
Note: the excavators though that it is an intrusive object,
originally from level III.
Place: Rockefeller 36.944.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.4365; Pritchard 1943: type
V:166; Holland 1975: C.V.b.16; Beck 1991: note 3:13.
5.V.1.19. A head and upper body part from Megiddo.
Context: square 0/13, the temple area, level III. The exact
locus is not known.
Note: Holland thought that this figurine is a hollow pillar with
a peg for the head, but the photograph shows the broken
body-line, not a peg.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.787; Pritchard 1943: type
V:162; Holland 1975: B.V.c.4; Beck 1991: note 3:14.
5.V.1.20. A body fragment from Gebel Qal'ah (the citadel),
Amman.
Context: surface find.
Place: Amman, museum no. J.12313.
Literature: Dornemann 1983:129, pI. 89:3; Amr 1980: no. 86;
Beck 1991: note 3:E.
5.V.1.21. A whole figurine from Transjordan. Holland saw it
at Amman, but did not report about its origin.
Context: not clear.
Place: Amman, museum no. JT.1639.
Note: I could not locate this figurine in Amr's Ph.D.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.2.
269
5.V.1.22. A head and an upper body part from Samaria.
Reg. no. 4782.
Context: 67.sub, zone S.2, square H9. It is a room of the
Herodian (i.e., Roman) period, above earlier levels.
Note: Holland was the first to suggest that it is a woman with
a disk.
Literature: Samaria I: pI. 75b; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.24.
5.V.1.23. A head and upper body part from Samaria. Reg.
no. 4679.
Context: 840, zone 58; a room with a mixed assemblage
from the Herodian period. It is above the Iron Age palace.
Literature: Samaria I: pI. 75e; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.25.
5.V.1.24. A body fragment from Samaria. Reg. no. 3960.
Either a photograph or a draWing was not published.
Context: room 423 of the "ostraca house", Iron Age II.
Literature: Samaria 1:384, Holland 1975: C.vl.a.26.
5.V.1.25. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Aphek. The face is
damaged. There is a necklace and a little disk, held in both
hands.
Context: a favissa in a four-roomed house, 10th century BC.
Literature: Kochavi 1975:51f, pI. 11c; Beck 1991: note 3:19.
5.V.1.26. A nearly whole body from Tel Deir Alia. Reg. no.
DA/2609.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman, J.13773.
Literature: Van der-Koij and Ibrahim 1989: 104, no. 128; Amr
1980: no. 87, pI. 16:2.
5.V.1.27. A body fragment from Tel Deir Alia.
Context: DA/D/CI7.8. Level IV, 8th century BC (?).
Place: Amman, J.13746.
Literature: Amr 1980:63f, no. 34; Zayadine 1987: no. 159;
Beck 1991: note 3:b.
5.V.1.28. A nearly whole body from Tel Deir Alia. Reg. no.
DA/A/237?
Place: Leiden.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.6; Amr 1980: no. 35.
5.V.1.29. A nearly whole body from Tel Hadar. The legs are
missing. The figure holds a little drum that covers one
breast. Reg. no. 2016/1.
Context: locus 279, ca. 10th century BC.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the excavation
team.
5.V.1.30. A whole figurine from Tel Ira. It is hermaphrodite,
with a male sexual organ and female breasts. Reg. no.
4265/1.
Context: locus 512, a room of a public building near the
gate. Level VII, 7th century BC.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 84-62.
Literature: Beck 1991; Beit Arieh 1985:17-25.
Note: on androgynous gods in Egypt see Zandee, J. 1988.
Der Androgene Gott. in: Gorg, M. ed. Religion im Erbe
Agyptens. Wiesbaden:240-278.
5.V.1.31. A body fragment from Tel Amal (Nir-David).
Context: level IV, 10th century BC? The exact locus was not
publlshed.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 67-1134.
Literature: Edelstein 19??:25, fig. 21; Holland 1975:
C.Vl.a.1, pI. 45:4; Edelstein and Levy 1972: fig. 17:7; Beck
1991: note 3:7.
5.V.1.32. A body from Tel el-Far'ah (north). Museum no.
F.3426.
Context: locus 420 under floor 440, level Vllb. This is an
open area, not well defined. Ca. 11-1oth century BC.
Literature: De Vaux 1957: pI. 11b:1; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.8;
Chambon 1984: fig. 63:2, pI. 84; Beck 1991: note 3:16, fig.
8.
5.V.1.33. A body from Tel el-Far'ah (north). Museum no.
F.3031.
Context: locus 426, trench II, level Vllb. This area was
disturbed by foundations of the later building 411. Ca. 11th-
10th centuries BC.
Literature: Chambon 1984: fig. 63:1, pI. 84; Beck 1991: note
3:17.
5.V.1.34. A head and an upper body part, probably from
Kerak (Moab). It is very crude, with a hat (not applied) and
peculiar decorations.
Context: unknown.
Place: Amman TJ.421.
Literature: Harding 1937: pI. X:9; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.6;
Beck 1991: note 3:g.
5.V.1.35. A head and an upper body part, probably from
Kerak (Moab). The drum is very small and simple.
Context: unknown.
Place: private collection.
Literature: Harding 1937: pI. X:8; Glueck 1945: fig. 83:left;
Grohman 1962:419, fig. 64; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.13; Beck
1991: note 3:f.
5.V.1.36. A head and an upper body part (from Transjordan?
- the exact origin is unknown). The drum is simple.
Context: unknown.
Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art, no. 3818.
Literature: Zemer 1991:26 no. 37, photograph p. 93.
5.V.1.37. A whole body from Megiddo. It is badly preserved.
Context: locus 1760, a paved area of level VII with but few
remains of walls.
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:20; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.15.
5.V.1.38. A whole mould for a figurine from Ta'anakh.
Context: destruction layer in the "cultic building", room 1,
10th century BC.
Literature: Lapp 1964:39-41, fig. 21; BA 30/1: fig. 3; Holland
1975: N.l.a.6; Beck 1991: note 3:8, fig. 2; Nakhai 1994:27.
5.V.1.39. A body fragment from Kh. Ayun Musa (near Nebo).
Context: surface find.
Literature: Hencke 1959: pI. 4b; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.23;
Beck 1991: note 3:c.
5.V.1.40. A nearly whole body from Tel Deir Alia. It is very
similar to no. 28 (above). The legs are missing. Reg. no.
DAlB.124.
Context: not published.
Place: Amman J.12699.
Literature: Franken 1960: pI. 13a; Franken 1963: pI. 41a;
Amiran 1967: note 4; Holland 1975: C.Vl.a.7; Amr 1980: no.
33; Beck 1991: note 3:a.
5.V.1.41. A head and upper body part from Transjordan
(exact origin unknown). It is similar, but not identical with
figurine no. 35 (above). It holds an object, but not
necessarily a drum.
270
Context: unknown.
Place: Amman J.11145. Size 42x66 mm.
Literature: Amr 1980: no. 81, pI. 15:1.
5.V.1.42. A head and upper body part from Malhata. It is not
well preserved. There are long side-locks, divided into three
combed strands or bands. Reg. no. 1719.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of Y. Beit Arieh.
5.V.2: Plaque Figurines with "Hathor
Hairdress"
General Note. I have included here whole figurines, heads
with upper body parts and heads. Nearly all of these have a
rounded clay background at the top, and are made in
shallow moulding. The position of the arms varies.
5.V.2.1. A figurine from Beth Shemesh. The hands hold lotus
branches.
Context: room 468, Iron Age I.
Literature: AS III: pI. 19; AS IV: pI. 51:17; Pritchard 1943:
type 1A:14; Holland 1975: C.V.a.1.
5.V.2.2. A mould from Gezer. The hands hold lotus
branches.
Context: Macalister's ''third Semitic" level, the entrance to the
water system.
Literature: Gezer 1:262, 264; Gezer III: pI. 19:16; Pilz 1924:
B.62, fig. 13.
5.V.2.3. A figurine from Gezer. One hand holds the breast,
the other lies along the body.
Context: zone 29.IV, "third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer 11:413; Gezer III: pI. 220:23; Pilz 1924:137,
A451; Pritchard 1943: type Il.d:105; Holland 1975: C.l.a.2.
5.V.2.4. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts.
Context: not clear; "fourth Semitic", Persian or Hellenistic
periods.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:11; Pilz 1924: A3b.44, fig. 28;
Pritchard 1943: type lIa:43; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.11.
5.V.2.5. A whole figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the
breasts. The head has no clay background.
Context: the "high place" area, but the exact location is
unknown.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 500, 403, 415; Pilz 1924: A3b.38,
fig. 28; Pritchard 1943: type lIa:40; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.14.
5.V.2.6. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts.
Context: the water system. s C.IV.a.10.
Literature: Gezer II: pI. 19:17; Pilz 1924: A3b.45, fig. 28;
Pritchard 1943: type lIa:44; Holland 1975:~C.II.a.17.
5.V.2.7. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts.
There are lotus flowers above the figure.
Context: zone 29.IV, "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:5; Pilz 1924:142, no. 90;
Pritchard 1943: type IIc:99; Holland 1975: C.ll.c.2.
5.V.2.8. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus
branches.
Context: the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:22; Pritchard 1943: type la:7;
Holland 1975: C.V.a.2.
5.V.2.9. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus
branches.
Context: zone 19.VI, the Hellenistic level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:3; Pritchard 1943: type la:8;
Holland 1975: C.V.a.3.
[Fig. 11:3].
5.V.2.10. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus
branches.
Context: a mixed assemblage.
Place: Rockefeller P.14.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:10; Pilz 1924:139, B.64;
Pritchard 1943: type la:11; Holland 1975: C.V.a6.
5.V.2.11. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus
branches.
Context: the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:22; Pritchard 1943: type la:7;
Holland 1975: C.V.a.2.
5.V.2.12. A figurine from Gezer. The hands probably hold
lotus branches.
Context: the "third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:4; Pilz 1924:142, no. 92;
Pritchard 1943: type 111:127; Holland 1975: C.V.a.10.
5.V.2.13. A figurine from Gezer. The hands probably hold
lotus branches.
Context: the "third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:20; Pilz 1924: no. B59; Pritchard
1943: type la:6; Holland 1975: C.V.a.11.
5.V.2.14. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands
probably hold lotus branches. Reg. no. 100.
Context: locus 4022, a refuse pit with mixed contents.
Literature: Dever a.o. 1970: pI. 37:11, 25a.
5.V.2.15. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands are
uplifted to the sides.
Context: zone II1a28, between the "third Semitic" and the
"fourth Semitic" levels.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:14; Pilz 1924: no. B65; Pritchard
1943: type Ib:21; Holland 1975: C.V.b.3.
5.V.2.16. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands are
uplifted to the sides.
Context: the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:12; Pilz 1924:139, no. B66;
Pritchard 1943: type Ib:20; Holland 1975: C.V.b.2.
5.V.2.17. A head from Gezer.
Context: zone 111.22, the "second Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:8; Pilz 1924: no. Fb:106;
Pritchard 1943: type Vllla:246; Holland 1975: C.VIII.b.1.
5.V.2.18. A head from Gezer.
Context: zone V.30, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:5; Pilz 1924: no. Fb:115;
Pritchard 1943: type Vllla:247; Holland 1975: C.VlIl.b.2.
5.V.2.19. A head from Gezer.
Context: zone VI.16, the Hellenistic level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:2; Pilz 1924: no. Fb:118;
Pritchard 1943: type Vllla:248; Holland 1975: C.VlIl.b.3.
5.V.2.20. A head from Gezer with a unique headdress.
Context: zone IV.2, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 496; Pilz 1924: no. Fb:108; Pritchard
1943: type 8A:271; Holland 1975: C.IX.f.1.
271
5.V.2.21. A figurine from Gezer. The hands probably hold
lotus-branches. Reg. no. 1297.
Context: locus 34086, NE.34.314. Level 10 (?), probably
Late Bronze Age period.
Literature: Dever a.o. 1986: pI. 54:2.
5.V.2.22. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus-
branches. Reg. no. 907.
Context: locus 25047, NE.25.100. Level6a, Late Bronze Age
period.
Literature: Dever a.o. 1986 (Gezer IV): pI. 58:8.
5.V.2.23. A figurine from an unknown origin. The hands
probably hold lotus-branches.
Context: unknown.
Place: Rockefeller P.22.
Note: Pilz suggested that this figurine is the same as no. 10
(above). This is unlikely, since each figurine has a separate
museum number.
Literature: Vincent 1907: pI. 3:10; Holland 1975: C.V.a.17.
5.V.2.24. A whole figurine from Lachish. The hands hold the
breasts. The feet point to the sides. Reg. no. 6754.
Context: grave 71, area 500. The grave is probably from the
Late Bronze age.
Literature: Lachish IV: pI. 49:1; Holland 1975: C.II.c.3.
5.V.2.25. A whole figurine from Lachish. The hands hold
lotus-branches. The feet point to the left. Reg. no. 6990.
Context: locus 4034, the "potter's cave". The end of the Late
Bronze age.
Literature: Lachish IV: pI. 49:4; Holland 1975: C.v.a.14.
5.V.2.26. A nearly whole figurine (composed of two
fragments) from Megiddo. The hands hold the breasts. The
feet point to the side.
Context: Schumacher's "Mittelburg", level III.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 17a; Holland 1975:
C.v.a.15.
5.V.2.27. A figurine from Megiddo. The hands hold the
breasts.
Context: Schumacher's "Nordburg".
Literature: Schumacher 1908:65, fig. 86; Vincent 1907: pI.
3:9; Pilz 1924: B.54; Pritchard 1943: type i:1; Holland 1975:
C.V.a.16.
5.V.2.28. A figurine from Tel Abu-Hawwam. The hands are
placed along the body.
Context: level IV, square E2, a residential area of the Iron
Age 1 period.
Place: Rockefeller 34.343.
Literature: Hamilton 1935:31, no. 176; Holland 1975:
5.V.2.29. A nearly whole figurine from Tel el-Hesi. The
hands hold lotus-branches.
Context: level 3.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: pI. 68:2h; Pritchard
1943: type la:5; Holland 1975: C.V.a.13.
5.V.2.30. A whole figurine from Ta'anakh. The hands are
placed on the belly. The feet point to the sides.
Context: level 4 (?).
Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 52; Pilz 1924: D.82; Pritchard
1943: type 111:130, fig. 12; Driver 1922:59; Holland 1975:
C.lIl.a.5.
5.V.2.31. A figurine from an unknown origin. The left hand
lies on the belly, the right one on the chest.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Vincent 1907: pI. 3:11; Pilz 1924: A4:50; Pritchard
1943: type IId:104; Holland 1975: C.l.c.2.
5.V.2.32. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The hands are
placed along the body. There is almost no clay background.
The figurine is pressed in a deep mould (cf. type 5.V.9
below).
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:50; Pritchard 1943: type
111:113; Holland 1975: C.IV.b.7.
5.V.2.33. A whole figurine from Gezer. The hands hold lotus
branches. There is an Egyptianized type of crown on the
head. The legs point aside.
Context: zone 3.IV, ''third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer 11:413, fig. 498; Pilz 1924: F:100; Pritchard
1943: type la:17; Holland 1975: C.V.a.7.
5.V.3: Plaque Figurines with 'Feathers' above
the Forehead and 'Hathor' Side-locks
5.V.3.1. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The left hand is
placed on the lower belly, the right one on the chest.
Context: zone 28, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Place: Rockefeller P.43.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:18; Pilz 1924: M:48, fig. 11;
Pritchard 1943: type IId:101; Holland 1975: C.l.c.1.
5.V.3.2. A figurine from Gezer. The hands are placed on the
chest.
Context: the "third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:1; Pilz 1924: A3a:28; Pritchard
1943: type IIb:92; Holland 1975: C.II.a.7.
5.V.3.3. A figurine from Gezer. The hands lie on the chest.
There is probably an indication of pregnancy.
Context: the "third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:19; Pilz 1924: A3a:29; Pritchard
1943: type IIb:93; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.8.
5.V.3.4. A figurine from Gezer. The hands are placed on the
chest.
Context: the "third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:16; Pilz 1924: A3a:27; Pritchard
1943: type IIb:91; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.9.
[Fig. 11:4].
5.V.3.5. A figurine from Gezer. The hands are placed on the
chest.
Note: there are no "Hathor' side-locks.
Context: a cave in zone 29, without a clear date.
Place: Rockefeller P.30.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:17; Pilz 1924: A3a:31; Pritchard
1943: type IIb:95; Holland 1975: C.II.a.10.
5.V.3.6. A fragment of a head from Gezer.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Gezer II: fig. 497; Pilz 1924: A3a:22; Pritchard
1943: type IIb:96; Holland 1975: C.VlIl.a.1.
5.V.3.7. A figurine from Gezer. The hands are placed on the
chest (?), but are badly broken.
Context: locus 4022, cf. figurine no. 5.V.2.14 above.
272
Literature: Dever a.o. 1970: pI. 37:10, 25b.
5.V.4: Plaque Figurines with "Crescent"
Hairdresses
5.V.4.1. A whole figurine from Tel Beit-Mirsim. The hands lie
on the belly. Reg. no. SN.1387.
Context: square SE.22.
Place: Rockefeller i.9017.
Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:6; Albright 1939: pI. A:6; Pritchard
1943: type Vla:177; Holland 1975: C.lIl.a.4.
[Fig. 11:5].
5.V.4.2. A figurine from Tel Beit-Mirsim. It is similar to
figurine no. 1 (above). Reg. no. SN.1227.
Context: square SE.23, level B.
Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:10; Albright 1939: pI. A:10;
Pritchard 1943: type Vla:173; Holland 1975: C.lIl.c.1 (or
C.lIl.a.1?).
5.V.4.3. A body fragment from Tel Beit-Mirsim. It is similar
to nos. 1-2 (above). Reg. no. SN.1120.
Context: square SE.24b, level B.
Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:7; Albright 1939: pI. A:7; TBM III:
pI. 55:1; Pritchard 1943: type Vla:175; Holland 1975:
C.lIl.a.2.
5.V.4.4. A body fragment from Tel Beit-Mirsim. It is similar
to nos. 1-2 (above). Reg. no. SN.1208.
Context: square SE.14 near silo 36, level B.
Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:8; Albright 1939: pI. A:8; TBM III:
pI. 55:3; Pritchard 1943: type Vla:176; Holland 1975:
C.lIl.a.3.
5.V.4.5. A nearly whole figurine from Jericho. The hands lie
along the body.
Context: room or court MV2, probably in a public building.
Late Bronze Age.
Place: London.
Literature: Garstang 1934: pI. 43:3; Bienkowski 1986: fig. 61;
Holland 1975: C.IV.a.13.
5.V.4.6. A figurine from Megiddo. The hands lie along the
body (?). The hairdress is not very clear in the photograph.
Context: locus 1817, level VilA, end of the Late Bronze age.
It is a room or an open area in a domestic area.
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 242:14, M.6085; Holland 1975:
C.IV.a.16.
5.V.4.7. A figurine from Shechem. The hands lie along the
body (?).
Context: the south-eastern ''temend's'', but the level and the
date are not clear. .~
Literature: Sellin 1927: pI. 29:a; Pritchard 1943: type 111:139;
Holland 1975: C.IV.a.19.
5.V.4.8. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Yosef. The hands
lie along the body (?).
Context: surface find.
Literature: lori 1958: pI. 7:4; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.20.
5.V.4.9. A whole figurine from Tel Masad. The hands lie
along the body, the feet point forward.
Context: a Late Bronze - Iron age 1tomb.
Literature: lori 1958: pI. 7:3; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.15.
5.V.4.10. A figurine from Shechem. The hands lie along the
body (?).
Context: surface find.
Literature: lori 1958: pI. 7:1; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.14.
5.V.4.11. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands lie
along the body.
Context: between the city walls, south of the gate.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:13; Pilz 1924: 0.88; Pritchard
1943: type 111:121; Holland 1975: C.rV.a.8.
5.V.4.12. A figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts.
The side-locks nearly reach the shoulders. Reg. no. 431.
Context: locus 1031.1, level 10, fills of earth under wall
1031. Iron age I period.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 74-53.
Literature: Holland, in: Dever, et. al. 1974: pI. 40:15; Holland
1975: C.ll.a.17a (addenda).
5.V.4.13. A whole figurine from Gezer. The hands hold the
breasts. It is very similar to figurine no. 12 (above).
Context: fills inside the water system.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:15; Pilz 1924: A3b:46; Pritchard
1943: type lIa:45; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.17b.
5.V.4.14. A nearly whole figurine from Tel es-Safi. The
hands hold the breasts.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Bliss and MAcalister 1902: pI. 67:16; Pilz 1924:
A3a:36; Holland 1975: C.II.a.21.
5.V.4.15. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The hands
hold lotus-branches.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:12; Pilz 1924: B.63; Pritchard
1943: type la:10; Holland 1975: C.V.a.5.
5.V.4.16. A figurine from Gezer. The hands lie along the
body (?).
Context: zone 28?, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:9; Pilz 1924: B+D.93; Pritchard
1943: type Id:36; Holland 1975: CVa.9.
5.V.4.17. A nearly whole figurine from Beth Shean. The
hands lie along the body.
Context: level IX, 14th century BC.
Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 68a:3; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.2.
5.V.4.18. A figurine from Tel el-Ajjul. The hands hold the
breasts. The hair is arranged in triangular locks that do not
reach the shoulders.
Context: LZ buildings, locus 8, an open area. 10th-9th
centuries BC (Albright's dating).
Literature: Petrie 1933: pI. 16:45; Pritchard 1943: type Ila:53;
Holland 1975: C.ll.a.1.
5.V.4.19. A nearly whole figurine from Jericho (Garstang's
excavations). The hands are uplifted and extended to the
sides. .
Context: unknown.
Literature: Holland 1975: CVa.13, pI. 10:5.
5.V.4.20. A figurine from Tel el-Far'ah (south). The hands
are placed along the body (?).
Context: silo ZZW, date not clear.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.a.6, pI. 9:10.
273
5.V.4.21. A nearly whole figurine from Tel el-Far'ah (south).
The hands lie along the body (?). The side-locks reach the
shoulders.
Context: area E, date not clear.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.IV.a.7, pI. 10:1.
5.V.4.22. A figurine from Azeka. The hands are placed on
the breasts.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Bliss 1899: pI. 6:3; Bliss and Macalister 1902: pI.
67:12; Pilz 1924: A3b.35; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.23.
5.V.5: Plaque Figurines with "Feather Hats",
without Clay Backgrounds
5.V.5.1. A mould for a head of a plaque figurine from
Megiddo.
Context: Schumacher's "palace".
Literature: Schumacher 1908: fig. 158a; Pilz 1924: A3a.30;
Pritchard 1943: type IIb:94; Holland 1975: C.VlIl.a.2.
5.V.5.2. A head from Megiddo.
Context: room 591, a domestic building in square P.14. Iron
Age (?). The excavators mentioned that this area is very
disturbed.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 31:M.227; Holland 1975: C.IX.a.1.
5.V.5.3. A head from Ta'anakh.
Context: the "western fortress", above the "outer wall".
Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 51; Holland 1975: C.IX.a.2.
5.V.5.4. A whole figurine from Ta'anakh. The hands hold the
breasts, the feet point to the front.
Context: the "western fortress, third level".
Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 47; Driver 1922: facing p. 57:1;
Pritchard 1943: type IIb:72; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.18.
[Fig. 11:6].
5.V.6: Plaque Figurines with "Ureus Symbol",
without Clay Backgrounds
5.V.6.1. A head from Gat (in the Sharon plain).
Context: surface find.
Note: Giveon suggested that the sign on the head is similar
to the Egyptian ureus.
Literature: Giveon 1967: pI. 10:3; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.2.
5.V.6.2. A figurine from Megiddo. The hands hold the
breasts.
Context: square M.12, a residential (?) area. Level VII, under
the later stables.
Place: Rockefeller 39.489.
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:18; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.13.
5.V.6.3. A head from Megiddo.
Context: locus 2071, part of a public (?) building in area AA,
level Via.
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:23; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.1.
5.V.6.4. A head from Ta'anakh.
Context: 12th century BC (?).
Literature: Lapp 1964: fig. 22:7; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.5.
5.V.6.5. A head from Ta'anakh.
Context: 12th century BC (?). According to the excavator, the
head dates to the Late Bronze age.
Literature: Lapp 1967: fig. 25:1; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.6.
5.V.6.6. A head from Ta'anakh.
Context: the eastern trench; the date and the context are not
clear.
Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 96:b; Vincent 1907: fig. 105b; Pilz
1924: Fb:122; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.4.
[Fig. 11:7].
5.V.6.7. A head from Ta'anakh.
Context: the eastern trench; date and context are not clear.
Literature: Sellin 1904: fig. 96:a; Vincent 1907: fig. 105a; Pilz
1924: Fb:121; Holland 1975: C.IX.b.3.
[Fig. 11:8].
5.V.7: Plaque Figurines with Unique Features
5.V.7.1. A figurine of a woman playing a double flute from
Beth Shean. The legs are missing. Reg. no. 649. Museum
no. 29-103-932.
Context: locus 25, in a mixed area, levels V or IV.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:2; Holland 1975: C.VI.b.1.
5.V.7.2. A figurine of a woman holding a child from Beth
Shean. The face is crude. It is made in high moulding,
without a clay background. Reg. no. 30-11-41.
Context: under loci 1459 and 33, lower level V, ca. 10th
century BC. Place: Rockefeller i.9660.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:7; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.1.
5.V.7.3. A fragment of a woman holding a child from Beth
Shean. The moulding is reminiscent of figurines type 5.V.1
(above). Reg. no. 25-11-105. Museum no. P29-103-881.
Context: locus 1063, lower level V, ca. 11 century BC.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 111:6; Pritchard 1943: type
Vlb:186; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.2.
5.V.7.4. A fragment of a woman holding a child from
Samaria. Reg. no. C1199.
Context: level A, season 1933. Possibly from locus E.207,
8th century BC.
Note: perhaps the fragment was made in a double mould.
Place: Rockefeller 33.2187.
Literature: Samaria 111:77, fig. 6b; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.6.
5.V.7.5. A whole figurine from Beth Shean. The hands are
placed on the chest. It is very crude.
Context: inside burial T241 , the Iron Age I period.
Note: figurines nos. 5.V.5-7 are very similar to each other,
and probably imitate Mycenaean figurines.
Literature: Oren 1973:125, pI. 76:2, fig. 50:12; Holland 1975:
c.xm.s.a
5.V.7.6. A whole figurine from Beth Shean. The hands are
placed on the chest. It is very crude.
Context: inside burial T241 , the Iron Age I period.
Literature: Oren 1973:125, pI. 76:3, fig. 50:14; Holland 1975:
C.XIII.a.2a.
5.V.7.7. A whole figurine from Beth Shean. The hands are
placed on the chest. It is very crude.
Context: inside burial T241 , the Iron Age I period.
Literature: Oren 1973:125, pI. 76:4, fig. 50:15; Holland 1975:
C.XIII. a.2b.
5.V.7.8-15. A group of eight figurines from Beth Shean. They
are whole, except two nearly whole ones. All have two
simple side-locks which reach the shoulders. The ears are
274
not represented. The moulding is crude and simple. The feet
turn to the front.
Context: tombs from the Late Bronze age, some of which
continued to be used in the Iron Age I period.
Note: Holland included only five of these figurines, missing
those which were published in the line-drawings.
Literature: Oren 1973: pI. 76:5-9, = figs. 45:24, 47b:26-27;
49:22; 50:13; also figs. 47b:28; 49:23-24. Holland 1975:
C.ll.b.2a-e.
5.V.7.16. A whole figurine from an unknown origin. The side-
locks reach the shoulders.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.II.b.20.
5.V.7.17. A figurine from Tel Zeror. The legs are missing.
The hands are placed on the chest. The hair is arranged in
a "Hathor" hairdress.
Context: tomb from level V, Iron Age I period.
Literature: Ohata 1967: frontispiece, pis. 45, 47:3; Ohata
1974:7, upper photograph.
[Fig. 11:9].
5.V.7.18. A head from Ashdod. The hairdress reaches the
shoulders. Reg. no. 1269/1.
Context: locus 1072, an open area in square F/11. The
stratigraphy is not clear.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 58:2, fig. 64:9; Holland 1975:
C.IX.g.2.
5.V.7.19. A head from Ashdod. It is similar to figurine no. 18
(above). Reg. no. 4078/1.
Context: locus 1099, an open area in square U/14. Levels 1-
2 (?).
Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 58:1, fig. 64:8; Holland 1975:
C.IX.g.1.
5.V.7.20. A body fragment from Megiddo. It shows a woman,
probably pregnant and carrying a child. Blue-black clay. The
right arm lies on the chest.
Context: square N10, level II. The exact locus is unknown.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 24:M.2653; Pritchard 1943: type
Vlb:184, fig. 18; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.4.
5.V.7.21. A head and an upper body part from Megiddo. The
hands hold the breasts. There are long side-locks of hair,
bracelets and perhaps a neck-pendant.
Context: floor 1693 of building 1723 (square R9). LevellVb.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5376; Pritchard 1943: type
VII:193; Holland 1975: C.II.b.17.
5.V.7.22. A head and an upper body from Megiddo. It has a
"Hathor' hairdress without clay-background. A pendant
hangs between the breasts (?). The hands are missing.
Context: room 590 in square P14, level V.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 26:M.1454; Holland 1975: C.IX.e.1.
5.V.7.23. A head from Megiddo. It has long side-locks and a
representation of ears. Reg. no. 619.
Context: tomb 3, a mixed assemblage of Late Bronze and
Iron Age periods. Square R/18.
Literature: Guy 1938: pI. 135:11; Holland 1975: C.IX.g.8.
5.V.7.24. A head and upper body part from Megiddo. It has a
long, pointed chin and large ears. The hairdress includes
rows of small indentations. The arms are placed on the
chest, one above the other.
Context: locus 1653 in square R/7. It is a room in a bUilding
of level V, ca. 10th century BC.
Place: Rockefeller 36.957.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 28:M.5042; Holland 1975: C.l.d.1.
5.V.7.25. A nearly whole figurine from Megiddo. The
hairdress reaches the shoulders, perhaps with a veil. The
woman wears a dress reaching her ankles. The hands lie on
the chest. There is probably a neck-pendant.
Context: locus 1482 in square R/8. This is a room in a
(public?) bUilding 1482, from level IVb.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 27:M.4495; Pritchard 1943: type
VII:170, fig. 18; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.16.
5.V.7.26. A head from Azeka. It has a wide hairdress but no
ears.
Notes: Engle did not find this figurine in Holland's thesis, but
it is included there. It is unclear whether it is a head of an
animal or a plaque figurine.
Context: unknown.
Place: Rockefeller P.70.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: pl. 68:5; Holland 1975:
C.IX.g.9; Engle 1979: type VII:36.
5.V.7.27. A head from Tel el-Far'ah (south). It shows a
woman with long side-locks, descending behind the ears to
the shoulders. High moulding of type 5.V.4 or 5.V.9.
Context: building phase T, height 377'3".
Literature: Holland 1975: C.ll.b.5.
5.V.7.28. A head from Tel Yeno'am. It is probably a plaque
figurine. Reg. no. 11124.
Context: locus 11.55, area B, Iron Age I period (?).
Place: Romema 1M no. 82-170.
Literature: Liebovitz 1984:14.
5.V.7.29. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
It has a necklace (?) and side-locks until the shoulders.
Context: EH.186, Iron Age I period (?).
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:7; Pritchard 1943: no. 258;
Holland 1975: C.ll.b.9.
5.V.7.30. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The face is very crude and the published photograph is not
good. It is different from the other plaque figurines from Tel
Gemmeh.
Context: ES.191, a street in Petrie's "21st dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:28; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.11.
5.V.7.31. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It
has side-locks that reach the shoulders and a clay-
background. It may have belonged to type 5.V.4 (above).
Context: CM.190, Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city. According to
Kenyon, the date is the 8th-7th centuries BC.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:24; Holland 1975: vol. 1:224,
C.IX.d.4.
5.V.7.32. A head.and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The side-locks reach the shoulders.
Context: FL.188, Petrie's "22nd dynasty" city.
Place: London.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:224, vol. 11:107, C.IX.d.3.
5.V.7.33. A head and an upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The side-locks reach the shoulders. High moulding.
Context: ES.192, a street in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:26; Holland 1975: C.IX.d.2.
5.V.7.34. A female body from Megiddo. It has a kind of a
peg at its back. Holland classified it as a plaque figurine. The
275
hands hold an object. There are horizontal incisions on the
lower body.
Context: locus 548, an open area in square N7, near an
"Assyrian" building (1369) of level III.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 30:M.1906; Holland 1975:
C.xIV.b.2.
5.V.7.35. A female body part from Megiddo. It is similar to
no. 34 (above). Reg. no. M.6221.
Context: locus 1827, its nature is not clear. Square 0.10,
level Vila, end of the Bronze Age period.
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 242:15; Holland 1975: C.XIV.b.3.
5.V.7.36. A body fragment from Samaria. It shows a dressed
female holding a child on her knee. Holland defined it as a
plaque figurine, but it may have been a hollow, rounded
figurine (e.g., of type 5.VI.1). Reg. no. C.1006.
Context: E.207, 9th century BC.
Literature: Samaria III: pI. 12:6; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.3.
5.V.7.37. A body fragment from Tel el-Far'ah (north). It
shows a dressed woman holding a baby, which suckles from
her breast. The woman wears a necklace and bracelets.
Museum no. F3452.
Context: level "pre-7b", square J.6, under locus 440. Perhaps
from the Late Bronze age.
Literature: Oe-Vaux 1957: pI. 11b:4; Cham bon 1984: fig.
63:4, pI. 84; Holland 1975: C.VII.a.3.
5.V.7.38. A head from Tel Malhata. Brown clay with bright
surface. The facial features are worn out. The hairdress is
similar to that of figurine no. 5.V.1.42, and both may have
been made in the same mould. Reg. no. 1625.
Context: Locus 1110.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit Arieh.
5.V.8: Body Fragments of Plaque Figurines
with Clay Background (of Types 5.11-5.VII)
5.V.8.1. A body fragment from Ashdod. The hands lie on the
chest. Reg. no. C176/1.
Context: locus 2001, a refuse pit from the Iron Age I period.
Literature: Ashdod I: pI. 17:10, fig. 35:4; Holland 1975:
C.ll.a.2.
5.V.8.2. A body fragment from Ashdod. The feet turn to the
front. Reg. no. 0215/3.
Context: locus 1008, a room disturbed by pits. Levels 3a-3b,
Iron Age II period.
Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 43:6; Holland 1975: C.XIII.a.1.
5.V.8.3. A body fragment from Beth Shean. The hands lie
along the body.
Context: locus 1062, a room from level VI, the Iron Age I
period.
Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 35:17; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.3.
5.V.8.4. A body fragment from Beth Shean. The hands are
extended and the feet turn to the sides.
Context: a secondary context of a Hellenistic period cistern.
Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 35:18; Holland 1975: C.V.b.1.
5.V.8.5. A nearly whole body from Beth Shemesh. The
hands lie on the chest.
Context: not stratified.
 Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:25; AS V:155; Pritchard 1943: type
lIa:48; Holland 1975: C.ll.aA.
5.V.8.6. A nearly whole body from Beth Shemesh. The
hands lie on the chest.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Mackenzie 1912-13: pI. 13b:2; Holland 1975:
C.ll.a.6.
5.V.8.7. A body fragment from Beth Shemesh. The feet turn
to the left.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Mackenzie 1912-13: pl. 13b:6; Holland 1975:
C'xII.b.1.
5.V.8.8. A body fragment from Gezer. The left hand lies
along the body, holding a small object. The right hand is
placed under the breast.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:6; Pilz 1924: A4:52; Pritchard
1943: type IId:48; Holland 1975: C.l.a.1.
5.V.8.9. A body fragment from Gezer. The hands hold the
breasts.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:3; Pilz 1924: A3b:39; Pritchard
1943: type lIa:54; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.12.
5.V.8.10. A body fragment from Gezer. The hands hold the
breasts.
Context: a cistern in zone 11, the ''third Semitic" level. It
contained a mix assemblage of the Iron Age and the Persian
periods.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 187:22; Pilz 1924: A3b:30; Pritchard
1943: type lIa:55; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.16.
5.V.8.11. A body fragment from Gezer. One hand holds the
breast (the other is missing).
Context: tomb 104, a mixed assemblage, mostly of the Iron
Age.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 78:47; Pilz 1924: A3b:41; Pritchard
1943: type lIa:56; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.15.
5.V.8.12. A body fragment from Gezer. The hands lie beside
the body.
Context: the "second Semitic" level, but the exact location is
unknown.
Place: Rockefeller P.44.
No~e: probably, the head has no clay background at all,
while the body has a very narrow one.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:11; Pilz 1924: 0:83, fig. 20;
Pritchard 1943: type 111:129; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.9.
5.V.8.13. A fragment of legs from Gezer.
Context: it was found on the bedrock without clear dating.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:7; Pilz 1924: B:67; Pritchard
1943: type Ic:29; Holland 1975: C.V.a.8.
5.V.8.14. A fragment of a mould from Gezer. It shows only
the legs.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:16.
5.V.8.15. A body fragment from Gezer. The feet turn to the
right and th~ hand~ are probably raised (now broken).
~ontext: a cistern In cave II, zone 15, but from the surface.
Lit~rature: Gezer 1:94; Gezer III: pI. 24:2; Pilz 1924: Fb:113;
Pntchard 1943: type Vllla:245; Holland 1975: C.XII.a.2.
276
5.V.8.16. A body fragment from Gezer. The feet turn to the
left.
Context: zone 30, the "fourth Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:4; Pilz 1924: Fb:114; Pritchard
1943: type Vllla:244; Holland 1975: C.XII.b.2.
5.V.8.17. A body fragment from Gezer. The feet turn to the
right.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:8; Holland 1975: C.XII.a.1.
5.V.8.18. A body fragment from Gezer. The feet turn to the
left. Reg. no. 1359.
Context: area VI, level 6c, Iron Age I period.
Literature: Oever a.o. 1986: pI. 55:4.
5.V.8.19. A body fragment from Gezer.
Context: zone 28, the "second Semitic" level.
Note: I could not locate figurines nos. 19-22 in Holland's
thesis.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:5a; Pilz 1924: Fb:105; Pritchard
1943: type 111:147.
5.V.8.20. A body fragment from Gezer. The left hand is
placed along the body, the right hand under the breast.
Context: the fill of the water system; the dating is not clear..
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:15; Pilz 1924: A4:53; Pritchard
1943: type lid: 100.
5.V.8.21. A body fragment from Gezer. The hands lie under
the breasts.
Context: the Hellenistic level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:14; Pilz 1924: A2:6, fig. 6;
Pritchard 1943: type IIlb:158.
5.V.8.22. A body fragment from Gezer. It is similar to no. 21
(above).
Context: zone 30, the "third Semitic" level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 221:13; Pilz 1924: A2:4; Pritchard
1943: type IIlb:157.
5.V.8.23. A nearly whole body from Gezer. The hands hold
the breasts. There are lotus blossoms on the sides of the
figure and probably also above the head (the beginning of
the branch survived).
Context: zone 29, the Hellenistic level.
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:21; Pilz 1924: A+0:91, fig. 17;
Pritchard 1943: type IIc:98, fig. 7; Holland 1975: C.ll.c.1.
5.V.8.24. A body fragment from Hazor. The hands lie on the
chest. Reg. no. B2I4255.
Context: locus 3265, an open area in building 3220. Level X,
10th century BC.
Literature: Hazor III-IV: pI. 207:36, pI. 314:2; Holland 1975:
C.ll.a.18.
5.V.8.25. A body fragment from Megiddo~ The feet turn to
the front.
Context: room 285 in a large building of level III, 8th century
BC.
Note: the clay background is narrow and long.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 30:M.878; Pritchard 1943: type
Vla:180; Holland 1975: C'xlll.a.10.
5.V.8.26. A body fragment from Shechem. The feet turn to
the right. Reg. no. i.169.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Kerkhof 1969: fig. 24:10; Holland 1975: C.XII.a.3.
5.V.8.27. A body fragment from Tel Beit Mirsim. There are
remains of breasts. The hands were uplifted (?), now broken.
Reg. no. SN.553.
Context: fills of level B in square 32.
Literature: TBM II: pI. 25:6, pI. 28:6; Albright 1939: pI. b:6;
Pritchard 1943: type 111:148; Holland 1975: C.X.a.1.
5.V.8.28. A feet fragment from Tel Beit Mirsim. There is a
narrow clay-background. Perhaps it belonged to types
5.V.4.1-4 (above). Reg. no. SN.1522.
Context: fills from an unclear date in square 23.
Literature: TBM II: pI. 26:9; Albright 1939: pI. a:9; Pritchard
1943: type Vla:174; Holland 1975: C.X.b.2.
5.V.8.29. A body fragment from Tel Gemmeh. The hands
hold the breasts.
Context: JB.174, an open area outside building JO-JG-JF.
Late Bronze age (?).
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:2; Pritchard 1943: no. 47;
Holland 1975: C.ll.a.19.
5.V.8.30. A body fragment from Tel Gemmeh. It is quite
similar to figurine no. 29 (above). The published photograph
is not very clear.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:1; Pritchard 1943: no. 46;
Holland 1975: C.ll.a.20.
5.V.8.31. A body fragment from Tel Gemmeh. The hands lie
along the body.
Context: JB.177, an open area. Late Bronze age (?).
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:5; Pritchard 1943: no. 119;
Holland 1975: C.IV.a.12.
5.V.9: Plaque Figurines of Pregnant Women
in High Moulding
5.V.9.1. A nearly whole body from Ashdod. One hand lies on
the chest, the other is placed along the body. Reg. no.
0868/1.
Context: locus 1067, a pit in squareA19. Level 2.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:1, fig. 64:1; Holland 1975:
C.l.b.2.
5.V.9.2. A nearly whole figurine from Ashdod. One hand lies
on the chest, the other is placed along the body. There is a
kind of a hairdress above (?) the side-locks, which descend
until the breasts. Reg. no. 0190/1.
Context: locus 1004, a pit in a room in square A16. Level 3b.
Literature: Ashdod I: pI. 28:2, fig. 43:4; Holland 1975:
C.l.b.1.
5.V.9.3. A body fragment from Ashdod. The hands lie on the
chest. Reg. no. 0636/1.
Context: locus 1051, a large room in square B4. Level 3a.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:2, fig. 64:2; Holland 1975:
C.IV.a.1.
5.V.9.4. A body fragment from Ashdod. One hand lies on the
chest, the other is probably placed along the body.
Context: not published.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:3; Holland 1975: C.l.b.3.
5.V.9.5. A body fragment from Ashdod. Reg. no. 01022/1.
Context: locus 1075, a small street in square A20, disturbed
by a pit. Levels 1-2.
277
Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:5, fig. 64:3; Holland 1975:
C.IV.a.1.
5.V.9.6. A body fragment from Ashdod. Reg. no. 5/51.
Context: surface find.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 63-2419 (?).
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 64:5; Holland 1975: C.Xl.e.2.
5.V.9.7. A body fragment from Ashdod. Reg. no. 0630/1.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 64:7; Holland 1975: C.Xl.e.3.
5.V.9.8. A nearly whole figurine from Gezer. The legs are
missing. There is a crescent shaped hairdress (of type
5.VA?). The hands lie on the chest.
Context: a cave or a cistern in zone 8, probably from the
Iron Age II period.
Literature: Gezer 1:81f; Gezer III: pI. 18:1; Holland 1975:
C.ll.b.18.
5.V.9.9. A body fragment from Ekron. The hands lie along
the body. There is no clay-background.
Context: survey find, not stratified.
Place: the Shephelah museum, Kefar Menakhem.
Literature: Naveh 1958:99 no. 3; Yisrael, M. 1959:130, n. 18,
photograph 2; Holland 1975: C.IV.b.9.
5.V.9.10. A body fragment from Tel Gemmeh. There is no
clay-background.
Context: EY.188, a store or a public room in Petrie's "22nd
dynasty" city. The locus was very disturbed by later pits.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:18; Holland 1975: C.Xl.c.3.
5.V.9.11. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. There is no
clay-background. The hands lie along the body. The figurine
is very thick.
Context: not published.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:34; Pritchard 1943: no. 128;
Holland 1975: C.XIV.c.3.
5.V.9.12. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. It is moulded
deeply on a very crude and large lump of clay, which has a
sort of a "peg" at its back. Perhaps it was attached to a wall.
The hands lie along the body.
Context: not published.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:35; Holland 1975: C.XIV.c.2.
5.V.9.13. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The
hands lie on the chest. There is no clay background.
Context: Petrie's "26th dynasty" city, the exact locus is not
clear.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:37; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.8.
5.V.9.14. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh.
The hands lie on the breasts. There are long, straight side-
locks. The published photograph is bad.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:3; Pritchard 1943: no. 137;
Holland 1975: C.ll.b.12.
5.V.9.15. A whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. One hand lies
on the chest, the other probably lies along the body (cf.
figurines nos. 1,9, 10 above). There is no clay background.
Context: FO.191, Iron Age II period.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 35:27; Pritchard 1943: no. 42;
Holland 1975: C.ll.b.10.
5.V.9.16. A nearly whole figurine from Tel Gemmeh. The
 legs are missing. The hair reaches the shoulders. There is a 5.V.10.4. A body without clay background from Gezer. The
clay background. The published photograph is blurred. The hands hold the breasts. There is some kind of a pattern on
figurine is similar to nos. 17-18 (below). the back (symbolizing a dress?).
Context: not published. Context: zone 27, the "second Semitic" level.
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:38; Holland 1975: C.xIV.c.1. Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:6; Pilz 1924: A3b:33; Pritchard
1943: type 2:52; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.6.
5.V.9.17. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It
is similar to figurine no. 16 above. 5.V.10.5. A body without clay background from Megiddo.
Context: unknown. The hands hold the breasts. There are horizontal lines on the
Place: Rockefeller 4350/35. neck (a necklace?). Field no. 1214.
Literature: Holland 1975:C.ll.a.20a, addenda, pI. 45:3. Context: locus S=3073 in square KU7, level VilA. It is a
room in the treasure house of the Late Bronze age (Loud
5.V.9.18. A head and upper body part from Tel Gemmeh. It 1948: plan 384).
is similar to figurine no. 16 above. Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 243:16; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.14.
Context: DR, an open area (?) in Petrie's "23rd dynasty" city.
Note: Petrie suggested that this figurine belonged to a late 5.V.10.6. A body without clay background from Megiddo.
Iron Age series, and related to an Edomite rule. The hands hold the breasts.
Literature: Petrie 1928:17, pI. 36:35; Holland 1975: C.IV.b.6. Context: square 0/12, surface find.
Note: according to the excavation report, it was made in a
5.V.9.19. A whole mould of a plaque figurine from Tel double mould, but the other similar fragments from Megiddo
Batash. The hands hold the breasts. There are long side- belonged to Late Bronze age plaque-figurines.
locks that reach the shoulders. Literature: May 1935: pI. 31:1477; Holland 1975: C.ll.b.15.
Context: area E, a floor of level III, end of the 8th century
BC. 5.V.10.7. A body without clay background from Ta'anakh. It
Literature: Kelm and Mazar 1991 :62f, fig. 18:b. is similar to figurine no. 5 (above), but is perhaps made in a
double mould.
5.V.9.20. A whole mould of a plaque figurine from Tel Place: ASOR Jerusalem.
Batash. The hands lie along the body. There are long side- Literature: Holland 1975: C.II.b.19a, addenda, fig. 76:2.
locks that reach the shoulders.
Context: area E, a floor of level III, the end of the 8th century 5.V.10.8. A body without clay background from Ta'anakh. It
BC. is similar to figurine no. 7 (above); perhaps it is made in a
Literature: Kelm and Mazar 1991 :62f, fig. 18:a. double mould. Iron Age I period.
Place: ASOR Jerusalem.
5.V.9.21. A mould for a head of a plaque figurine from Tel Literature: Holland 1975: C.II. b.19, fig. 19:3.
Batash. There is a necklace and the ears are not
represented. Since the head survived alone, it is hard to 5.V.10.9. A body fragment from Ashdod. The hands hold the
classify the type of figurine exactly. It may have belonged to breasts. Reg. no. B/12.
type 5.V.9, but perhaps indicated a Phoenician or a Cypriot Context: surface find.
influence. Place: Romema 1M no. 63-2512.
Context: area E, a floor of level III, the end of the 8th century Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 26: 1: Holland 1975: C.II. b.1.
BC.
Literature: Kelm and Mazar 1991:62f, fig. 18:c. 5.V.10.10. A body fragment from Hazor. There is an incised
"loop" on the belly. It is simialr to figurine no. 24 (below).
Reg. no. A4/1726.
5.V.10: Miscellaneous Body Fragments Context: locus 156a, an open area not well defined in square
G/9. Level VIII.
5.V.10.1. A body without clay background from Gezer. The Literature: Hazor II: pis. 64:14, 163:3; Holland 1975:
pubic triangle is shown by indentations. There are stumps of c.xte.a
hands. . Vla:181; Holland 1975: C.Xlll.a.s.
Context: the "first Semitic" level. 5.V.10.11. A body fragment from Beth Shean. It is made of
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:1; Pilz 1924: Fb:104; Pritchard black clay.
1943: type Vlla:228; Holland 1975: C.Xl.a.1. Context: room 1585 in square 017, level VI (Iron Age I
period).
5.V.10.2. A body without clay background from Gezer. The Literature: James 1966: fig. 107:10; Holland 1975:
pubic triangle is shown by incised lines. The legs are close C.XIV.dA.
together.
Context: a pit from the Hellenistic period in zone 28. 5.V.10.12. A body fragment from Beth Shean. The hands
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220: 19; Pilz 1924: Fb:119; Pritchard hold the breasts.
1943: type Vlla:241; Holland 1975: c.xi b.1. Context: room or court 1709 in square PI7, level VII or VII
(Late Bronze or Iron Age I periods).
5.V.10.2. A nearly Whole body with narrow clay background Literature: James 1966: fig. 107:7; Holland 1975:
from Gezer. The hands hold the breasts. C.XIII. a.2d.
Context: a fill in the entrance of the water system'
unstratified. ' 5.V.10.13. A body fragment without clay background from
Literature: Gezer III: pI. 220:7; Pilz 1924: A3b:47; Pritchard Beth Shean. Reg. no. P29-103-892.
1943: type lIa:60; Holland 1975: C.II. a.13. Context: area 2006 in square 0/8, level VI (?).
Literature: James 1966: fig. 107:4; Holland 1975: C.IV.b.1.
278
5.V.10.14. A body fragment from Beth Shemesh. Pritchard
thought that it is a pillar figurine (following AS V:156), while
Holland defined it as a mediatory type between plaque and
pillar.
Context: level II, Iron Age I (exact location not clear).
Literature: AS IV: pI. 51:28; Pritchard 1943: type 7:189;
Holland 1975: C.ll.b.3.
5.V.10.15. A fragment of legs from Gezer.
Context: the north-western house on the acropolis, level 5a-
c, Iron Age I period.
Literature: Dever 1971: BA 3414: fig. 15c; Holland 1975:
C.xIV.d.7.
5.V.10.16. A body fragment from Dalhamiyah. The pubic
area is indicated. Reg. no. 1820.
Context: Iron Age II period, other details not published.
Place: Romema, 1M no. 69-1540.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the 1M.
5.V.10.17. A body fragment with clay background from
Megiddo. Reg. no. 0619.
Context: pit or installation 5151 in area BB, levelVlla (end of
the Late Bronze age).
Literature: Loud 1948: pI. 242: 13; Holland 1975: C.X. b.1.
5.V.10.18. A body fragment from Hazor. Reg. no. 249/1.
Context: area G, unstratified.
Literature: Hazor III-IV: pI. 356:7; Holland 1975: C.lIl.a.1.
5.V.10.19. A thin body fragment from Hazor. There is almost
no clay background. The hands lie along the body. Reg. no.
525/6.
Context: area G, unstratified.
Literature: Hazor III-IV: pI. 356:9; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.11.
5.V.10.20. A body fragment from Megiddo. The hands lie
along the body.
Context: level 5, the "palace".
Literature: Schumacher 1908: fig. 149b; Holland 1975:
C.IV.a.17.
5.V.10.21. A body fragment from Megiddo. It is hand-made
and shows a pregnant woman. The navel is indented and the
pubic area is indicated.
Context: locus 592 in square 0/13, level V. The exact nature
of this locus is not clear.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 29: M.135; Pritchard 1943: type
5.V.10.22. A body fragment from Megiddo. It is very similar
to figurine no. 20 above.
Context: level VII.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 48:i; Pilz 1924: Fb:120;
Pritchard 1943: type 111:149; Holland 1975: C.IV.a.18.
5.V.10.23. A body fragment with clay-background from
Samaria. The hands hold the breasts. There is a "Hath or" or
crescent hairdress, probably similar to that of type 5.V.2 or
type 5.V.4. Reg. no. C.1270.
Context: locus E.207.
Literature: Samaria III: pI. 11:6; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.22.
5.V.10.24. A body fragment from Tel el-Far'ah (north). It has
an incised "loop" on the belly, like figurines nos. 10, 16
(above). Reg. no. F.2469.
Context: court 350 of a four-roomed house 327. Trench II,
level Vlld, ca. 7th century BC.
Place: Paris, Louvre AO.21587
279
Literature: Oe-Vaux 1952:572, pI. 15:14; Chambon 1984:74,
pI. 63:3; Holland 1975: C.Xl.c.1.
5.V.10.25. A body fragment from Tel Beit Mirsim. The hands
lie beside the body. Reg. no. SN.578.
Context: the eastern cave (TBM III: #11, plan 10), but
without a clear date.
Place: Rockefeller i.4942.
Literature: TBM II: fig. 25:7, pI. 28:7; Albright 1939; Holland
1975: C.IV.b.8.
5.V.10.26. A body fragment from Ta'anakh. The hands hold
the breasts.
Context: unknown.
Place: ACOR, Jerusalem.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.II. b.19b, fig. 76:3.
5.V.10.27. A body fragment from Malhata. It shows the legs
and the pubic area, marked by indentations. The moulding is
quite high. Red clay. Reg. no. 2038. Height: 63 mm.
Context: not published.
Note: fragments nos. 27-29 from Malhata may have
belonged to deep-moulded figurines, like type 5.V.9 (above).
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit-Arieh.
5.V.10.28. A body fragment from Malhata. It shows the legs
and the pubic area, marked by indentations. Red clay. Reg.
no. 2033. Height: 60 mm. See also note to no. 27 above.
Context: not published.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit-Arieh.
5.V.10.29. A body fragment from Malhata. It shows the legs,
pointing forward (but broken). There is no indication of the
sex. The moulding is very high, nearly square. Red clay.
Reg. no. 1743. Height: 57 mm. See also note to no. 27
above.
Context: not published.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of I. Beit-Arieh.
5.V.11: Miscellaneous Body Fragments
5.V.11.1. A fragment from Ashdod. Reg. no. 1415/1.
Context: area D, square G/11, locus 1087. It is an open
area, unstratified.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: fig. 64:6, pI. 57:4; Holland 1975:
c.xru a.2.
5.V.11.2. A fragment from Ashdod. It is unique and not
similar to any other figurine from Ashdod. Reg. no. 492/2.
Context: area D, surface find.
Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 46:5, pI. 27:8; Holland 1975:
C.XIV.d.1.
5.V.11.3. A fragment from Bethel. Either a drawing or a
photograph was not published. It is described shortly in the
excavation report as a fragment with clay-background and
hands on the chest. Reg. no. 104.
Context: unknown.
Literature: Kelso 1968: 84, 116; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.13.
5.V.11.4. A fragment from Bethel. Either a drawing or a
photograph was not published. It is described shortly in the
excavation report as a fragment of feet which turn to the left.
Reg. no. 243.
Context: locus 31 in area I, near an entrance of a house. Iron
Age I period.
Literature: Kelso 1968: 84; Holland 1975: C.xIV.d.3.
5.V.11.5. A fragment from Beth Shean. Reg. no. P29-103-
918.
Context: locus 1352, lower level V, Iron Age I period.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 111:7; Holland 1975: C.XIIl.a.7.
5.V.11.6. A fragment from Beth Shemesh. Either a drawing
or a photograph was not published. Reg. no. 445. According
to the excavation report, it is a body fragment with the hands
on the chest.
Context: unknown.
Literature: AS 111:91; Holland 1975: C.ll.a.5.
5.V.11.7. A fragment from Beth Shemesh. Either a drawing
or a photograph was not published. Reg. no. 1691.
Context: "near 107, level III". 107 is a room (storeroom?) in
area W28. The exeat locus and date are not clear.
Literature: AS 11:30; AS 111:91; Holland 1975: C.xIV.d.5.
5.V.11.8. A fragment of feet from Hazor. Reg. no. 680/1.
Context: locus 10055b, a street near the city wall. Area G,
level V, 8th century BC.
Literature: Hazor III-IV: pI. 356:8, pI. 253:11; Holland 1975:
C.XIII.a.8.
5.V.11.9. A fragment from Samaria. It is unique: the feet are
moulded on the front of a pillar body (cf. also figurine no. 10
below). Reg. no. C.1191a. Height 71 mm.
Context: locus E.207.
Place: Rockefeller 33.2185.
Literature: Samaria 111:79; Holland 1975: C.XIV.a.2, fig.
20:13.
5.V.11.10. A fragment from Ta'anakh. It shows feet,
moulded on a rounded, pillar-like body (cf. no. 9 above, but
the details of the moulding are different).
Context: the southern pit, but the exact location is unknown.
Literature: Sellin 1904:78, fig. 107; Holland 1975: C.XIV.a.3.
5.VI. 'Phoenician' Figurines
5.VI.1: Dea Tyria (Figurines of Pregnant,
Sitting Women)
5.VI.1.1. A whole figurine from Achzib. One hand lies on the
knee and the other is placed on the belly. There are very
thick side-locks, with rounded protrusions in the area of the
temples. The figurine is made in a hollow, double mould.
Note: it may be the same figurine as one in Romema, IAA
no. 61-564.
Context: the cemetery (for which see Prausnitz 1982).
Literature: Prausnitz, EAEHL 1:29 lower right (Hebrew);
EAEHL new 1:33 up right.
[Fig. 9:1].
5.VI.1.2. A whole figurine from Achzib. It is similar to figurine
no. 1 (above), but both hands lie on the knee and the side-
locks are narrow and long.
Context: tomb 28, no. 3, the cemetery of e-Ras.
Place: Rockefeller 44.263.
Literature: Prausnitz, EAEHL 1:29 lower right (Hebrew).
5.VI.1.3. A whole (?) figurine from Achzib. It is mentioned
only briefly, and there is a danger that it is one of the already
published figurines from Achzib (and not a new one).
280
Context: not published.
Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art, no. 3224.
Literature: Zemer 1991: 24 no. 26.
5.VI.1.4. A body fragment from Ashdod. It is similar to
figurine no. 1 (above) and is probably also hollow. Reg. no.
0.743/2.
Context: locus 1053, a kiln from the Hellenistic level (?). It is
situated inside a room in square A-B/3.
Place: Rockefeller 44.263.
Literature: Ashdod II-III: pI. 57:6, fig. 64:4; Holland 1975:
C.XV.a.1.
5.VI.1.5. A nearly whole figurine from Beth Shean. It is
similar to figurine no. 1 (above). Reg. no. 3427.
Context: under a floor of the Arabian period, unstratified.
Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 24:3 left; James 1966: fig. 116:7;
Holland 1975: C.XV.a.2.
5.VI.1.6. A whole figurine from Beth Shean. It is similar to
figurine no. 1 (above). There is red paint on white slip. Reg.
no. 3426.
Context: under a floor of the Arabian period, unstratified.
Place: Rockefeller P.1329.
Literature: Rowe 1940: pI. 24:3, second; James 1966: fig.
116:4; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.3.
5.VI.1.7. A head and upper body part from Megiddo. Both
hands are placed on the belly. The preservation state is very
bad.
Context: square N/13, under locus 282. Level IV, but the
exact context is not clear.
Note: probably it is a solid figurine made in a single mould.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 29: M.967; Pritchard 1943: type
6a:179; Holland 1975: C.lll.b.3.
5.VI.1.8. A nearly whole figurine from Machmish. The
position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1
(above).
Context: a temple from the Persian period, 5th-4th centuries
BC (?).
Note: this figurine is missing from Holland's thesis. There is
a possibility that it is only a profile of Avigad 1960: pI. 11a
(no. 10 below), but the photographs do not look similar.
Literature: Avigad 1960: pI. 11b.
5.VI.1.9. A whole figurine from Machmish. The position of
the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1 (above).
Context: a temple from the Persian period, 5th-4th centuries
BC (?).
Literature: Avigad, EAEHL 11:326 center (Hebrew); Holland
1975: C.xV.a.10.
5.VI.1.10. A whole figurine from Machmish. The position of
the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1.(above).
Context: a temple from the Persian period, 5th-4th centuries
BC (?).
Note: there is some danger that this is the same figurine as
no. 8 (above), but the photographs look different.
Literature: Avigad 1960: pI. 11a; Avigad 1970, EAEHL 11:326
right (Hebrew); Holland 1975: C.XV.a.9.
5.VI.1.11. A nearly whole figurine from Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. The
position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1
(above). Reg. no. S.1140.
Context: 31-C/d-5, level III? The exact nature of the locus is
not clear.
Place: Amman J.13019.
Literature: Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:6-7; Amr 1980:107ff, no.
70.
5.VI.1.12. A whole figurine from Tell es-Safi. The position of
the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1 (above).
Context: refuse debris, unstratified.
Note: Bliss and Macalister mentioned that dozens of
fragments of this type of figurine were found in the same
refuse pile. Only one example was drawn in the report.
Place: Rockefeller P.94.
Literature: Bliss and Macalister 1902: 138, pI. 70: 10; Stern
1973:167, n. 52; Holland 1975: C.XV.a.12.
5.VI.1.13. A body fragment from Tell Abu Hawwam. The
position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no. 1
(above). There is red slip.
Context: square on outside the city, level II, 6th-4th
centuries BC.
Note: according to the excavators, it is made of clay similar
to that of Phoenician jars (e.g., Hamilton 1935: fig. 3).
Place: Rockefeller 34.405.
Literature: Hamilton 1935: 17, no. 26; Holland 1975:
C.XV.a.6.
5.VI.1.14. A body fragment from Tell Abu Hawwam. It shows
part of the legs and the base, with the remains of one hand
on the knee.
Context: square on out of the city, level II, 6th-4th centuries
BC.
Place: Rockefeller 34.525.
Literature: Hamilton 1935:16, no. 25; Holland 1975:
C.XV.a.7.
5.VI.1.15. A whole figurine from an unknown ongm. The
position of the hands is similar to that of figurine no.
(above). The base is fenestrated.
Context: unknown.
Place: Hecht museum, Haifa.
Note: this item may be the same as one of the fragments
already mentioned above.
Literature: Raban and Stieglitz 1993:33, 20*.
5.VI.1.16. A body fragment from Kabri. It is made of orange
ware. Only the hollow base survived, made in a double
mould. It is not necessarily a base of a dea Tyria figurine.
Reg. no. 3440/100.
Context: locus 1309.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: Oren, R. 1994: pI. 20:4.
5.VI.2: Figurines of Women playing Drums
and Related Types
General: All the figurines of this type are made in a double
mould. The body is pillar like and hollow. Most of these
figurines show women playing a drum, held perpendicular to
the body (unless stated otherwise).
5.VI.2.1. A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks reach
the breasts and their lower ends are rounded, shaped like
earlobes. Height: 173 mm.
Context: the cemetery of e-Ras, tomb 13, no. 43.
Place: Rockefeller 44.53.
Literature: not yet published (?).
Note: it may be the same figurine as no. 5 (below).
281
5.VI.2.2: A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks are
similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The head is hollow
and has a hole in the back. Height: 230 mm.
Context: the cemetery of e-Ras, tomb 13, no. 44.
Place: Rockefeller 44.54.
Literature: Johns 1948, PEO:89, pI. 111:2 (?); Holland 1975:
B.V.b.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:3; Mazar, E. 1990:108, upper
left.
5.VI.2.3. A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks are
similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The body is a
hollow pillar. Height: 205 mm.
Context: the cemetery of e-Ras, tomb 28, no. 4 (season
1943).
Place: Rockefeller 44.264.
Literature: not yet published (?) - cf. the note to figurine no.
3a (below).
[Fig. 9:2].
5.VI.2.3a. A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks are
similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The facial features
are worn out. Height: 205 mm.
Context: a tomb?
Place: Hecht museum, Haifa 4046.
Literature: Zemer 1991:24, no. 29, photograph p. 95.
Note: it is probably the same figurine as no. 3 (above),
therefore it was numbered as "3a".
5.VI.2.4. A whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks are
relatively short and there are vertical curls above the
forehead. Height: 185 mm. Reg. no. 612 (?).
Context: a tomb; further details not published.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 61-563.
Literature: not yet published (?).
5.VI.2.5. A nearly whole figurine from Achzib. The side-locks
are similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The facial
features are not preserved well. Height: 225 mm.
Context: not published. 8th century BC (?).
Place: Hecht museum, Haifa no. 4047.
Literature: Zemer 1991:21 no. 30, 25, 85.
5.VI.2.6. A whole figurine from Achzib (excavations of E.
Mazar). The side-locks are not visible (either very short or
lacking completely). The head is badly preserved.
Context: a tomb, 8th-7th centuries BC.
Literature: Mazar, E. 1993, Had. Arch. 99: inner frontispiece,
4-5; EAEHL new I (1993):34.
5.VI.2.7. A whole figurine from Shiqmona. The side-locks are
long and twisted. Height: 250 mm. Reg. no. 7146nO?
Context: probably "B" city, dated to the 9th-8th centuries BC.
Elgavish (EAEHL IV) mentioned figurines (in plural) of this
type from level B.
Literature: Holland 1975: vol. 1:166; Eigavish 1978, EAEHL
IV:1102, 1109f; Zemer 1991:20 no. 28; probably also
Elgavish 1994: 68 fig. 44 (level X, 8th century BC).
[Fig. 9:3].
5.VI.2.8. A head and an upper body part from Tell Oitaf. The
side-locks are relatively short and there are vertical curls
above the forehead. The figure probably held a drum, now
broken.
Context: found by chance during military operations.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 54-91.
Literature: Zori 1958:53, pI. 7:5; Holland 1975: A.1X.e.1;
Engle 1979: type VIII:21.
 5.VI.2.9. A whole figurine from an unknown origin. The side-
locks are similar to those of figurine no. 1 (above). The face,
drum and dress are painted in red and black. Height: 217
mm.
Context: unknown.
Place: Harvard, Semitic museum no. 5755.
Literature: Meyers 1987, pI. 7:a; Meyers 1991:16.
5.VI.2.10. A whole figurine from an unknown origin. The
side-locks are long and twisted. H~ight: 161 mm. The facial
features are worn.
Place: Israel Museum, Jerusalem.
Literature: Ornan 1986: no. 10.
5.VI.2.11. A whole figurine from Achzib. It shows a woman
holding a dove close to her chest. The side-locks are incised
and the eyes are painted with white (?). Height: 190 mm.
Context: a tomb.
Place: Rockefeller 44.50.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.V.c.1; Engle 1979: type VIII:4.
5.VI:2.12. A whole figurine from Achzib. It shows a male (?)
playmg a double flute. The head is hollow and has a hole at
the back. Height: 200 mm.
Context: tomb 29: no. 89.
Place: Rockefeller 44.56.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.V.c.2; Engle 1979: type VIII:5;
Mazar, E. 1990: 108, lower right.
5.VI.2.13. A head and an upper body part from an unknown
origin. It is hollow. Remains of a drum (?) are seen on the
chest. The side-locks are long and the ears are portrayed.
Note: it seems to be a figurine of type 5.V1.2 and not 5.111
(see above).
Context: unknown.
Place: Romema IAA no. 52.901.
Literature: Holland 1975: B.V.d.2, pl. 44:1.
5.VI.2.14-15. Two body parts from Achzib. They are
cylindrical and hollow. One is probably part of a drum-
playing figurine, the other of a flute-playing figurine. Full
details not yet published.
Place: Tel Aviv.
Literature: Oren, R. 1994:33-34.
5.V1.3: Figurines portraying Daily Life Scenes
5.VI.3.1. A whole figurine of a bathing woman from Achzib.
The head is mould-made and has side-locks that reach the
shoulders. The ears are represented. Height: 108 mm.
Context: tomb 29, no. 60. Iron Age II period.
Place: Rockefeller 44.57.
Literature: Holland 1975: AIV.f.1; Jirku 1967: fig. 56:left;
Neufeld 1971: fig. 1; Engle 1979: type VIII:2.
5.VI.3.2. A whole figurine of a woman from Achzib. She is
standing bent above an object which is held in her hands (a
phallus?). The figurine is hand-made. Height: 124 mm.
Context: tomb 36, no. 154. Iron Age II period.
Place: Rockefeller 44.58.
Literature: Holland 1975: AXlIl.b.6, pI. 43:2.
5.VI.~.3. A whole figurine of a woman from Achzib. She is
standmg .bent on a rectangular base, preparing dough on a
table. HeIght: 75 mm.
Context: tomb 3, no. 4. Iron Age II period.
Place: Rockefeller 44.51.
282
Literature: Holland 1975: AI.i.1; Pritchard 1958: fig. 22;
Prausnitz 1975, EAEHL 1:29, lower left.
[Fig. 9:4].
5.VI.4: Other, Fairly Whole Figurines
5.VI.4.1. A whole plaque-figurine of a naked woman from
Achzib. She is standing with her hands beside her body. The
feet point forward. The face is surrounded by long side-locks
and a high cylindrical hat. Height: 195 mm.
Context: not published.
Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art no. 3322.
Literature: Zemer 1991: no. 25.
5.VI.4.2. A whole plaque-figurine of a naked woman from
Achzib. It is similar to figurine no. 1 above. Height: 190 mm.
Context: not published.
Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art no. 3223.
Literature: Zemer 1991: no. 27.
5.VI.4.3. A head and an upper body part from Achzib. It
shows a woman holding a child. The body is hollow and
wheel-made. The face is hand-made (according to Holland).
The woman's chin touches the head of the child.
Context: locus 4012, a tomb.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 63-932.
Literature: Moscati 1964: pI. 23; Moscati 1968: pI. 71;
Holland 1975: B.II. c.1.
5.VI.4.4. A head and an upper body part from Dor. It shows
a woman holding a child (?). The figurine is crude and hand-
made.
Context: area G, Iron Age?
Place: Romema, IAA no. 89-62.
Literature: Stern 1992: photograph 70.
5.VI.4.4a. A whole figurine from an unknown origin. It shows
a dressed woman, standing and holding a child. It is hollow
and made in a double mould. The feet turn forward. The face
is surrounded with long side-locks. The head of the child is
placed on the woman's shoulders. Height: 185 mm.
Context: not published.
Place: Haifa, museum of modern art no. 3932.
Note: this is probably a figurine of the Persian period,
therefore not numbered independently in the catalogue.
Literature: Zemer 1991:27, no. 47 (no. 46 in the
photograph).
5.VI.5: Various Heads (nos. 1-24,36-38) and
Body Parts (nos. 25-35, 39-41)
5.VI.5.1. A hollow female head from-Beth Shean. It is mould-
made and has a hole in the back. There are side-locks until
the height of the chin, with horizontal IfOes. Vertical lines
indicate hair above the forehead. Red slip. Reg. no. P29-
103-878.
Note: Holland included heads nos. 1-2 (here) in his AIV
type, although he noticed that they are exceptional.
Context: locus 92, a room in square Q/8. Level IV, ca. 9th
century BC.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:1; Holland 1975: AIV.g.2.
5.VI.5.2. A hollow female head from Beth Shean. It is mould-
made and similar to head no. 1 (above). Light brown slip.
Reg. no. P29-103-900.
Context: not stratified.
Note: cf. also head no. 1 above.
Literature: James 1966: fig. 115:3; Holland 1975: AIV.g.3.
5.VI.5.3. A solid female head from Gile'am (Kh. el-Rugm
near Kfar Ata). It is badly preserved. It has vertical lines
above the forehead and long side-locks. There are remains
of red paint. Reg. no. 15/1.
Context: surface find. The site was settled throughout the
Iron Age II and Persian periods.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 66-1730.
Note: Holland compared this head with heads from Philistia,
but now it can be compared with heads from Shiqmona
(nos. 17-18 below).
Literature: Stern 1970:34, fig. 6:14; Holland 1975: AIV.a.2a.
[Fig. 9:5].
5.VI.5.4. A moulded male (?) head from Dan. It has a
decoration of black paint and impressed circles on the
chicks.
Note: It is probably an import from the Aegean world, unique
in Israel so far (cf. Bisi 1989:260f).
Context: a pebble floor in a court of a building; level IV, ca.
10th century BC.
Literature: Biran 1992: fig. 134 bottom (preliminary
publication only)
5.VI.5.5. A hollow female head from Megiddo. It is mould-
made and has a hole in the back. There are side-locks
behind the ears, meeting under the chin.
Notes: Holland classified the 5.V1.5 heads from Megiddo as
solid (his type A). The form may look similar to a few heads
of type 5.111 (above), but the heads here are all hollow.
Context: area R/8, probably a room under locus 774. Level
II.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.4090; Holland 1975: AIV.f.6;
Engle 1979: type VIII:12.
5.VI.5.6. A hollow head from Megiddo. It is similar to head
no. 5 (above).
Context: area R/10, level I.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.1389; Holland 1975: AIV.f.5;
Engle 1979: type VIII:11.
5.VI.5.7. A hollow female head from Megiddo. It is mould-
made and has a hole in the back. There are long side-locks,
partly broken, but no signs of ears. There are remains of
white-wash.
Note: cf. heads of musicians of type 5.V1.2 (above).
Context: area R/9, surface find.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.2204; Holland 1975: AIX.b.1;
Engle 1979: type VIII:14.
5.VI.5.8. A hollow female head from Megiddo. It is mould-
made and has a hole in the back. There are long side-locks,
reaching the shoulders. The facial features are worn out.
Context: wall 844 in square 0/9, level I. This area is very
close to the surface and the stratification is doubtful (Lamon
and Shipton 1939:88, 222).
Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.2925; Holland 1975: AIV.f.7;
Engle 1979: type VIII:13.
5.VI.5.9. A hollow female head from Megiddo (partly
broken). It is mould-made and has a hole in the back. There
are long, twisted side-locks.
Notes: cf. a head of a musician, 5.VI.2.7 (above). Holland
thought that the hole was used for suspension, but it
prevents the explosion of the head during firing, when the air
inside is heated.
Context: area B, surface find.
283
Literature: May 1935: pI. 23: M.1360; Holland 1975: A.IV. h.t:
Engle 1979: type VIII:17.
5.VI.5.10. A hollow female head from Megiddo. It is mould-
made and has a hole in the back. The side-locks are short
and simple. There are vertical curls above the forehead and
red slip.
Note: cf. heads nos. 5.VI.2.4, 5.VI.2.8 above.
Context: locus 1025, a small room in a building; square 0/8,
levell or II.
Place: Rockefeller 36.936.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.3284; Holland 1975: AIX.e.2;
Engle 1979: type VIII:20.
[Fig. 9:6].
5.VI.5.11. A solid male head from Shiqmona. It has a high
hat with a tassel at its end. The ears are represented.
Note: I do not know comparisons from the land of Israel, but
similar heads of riders are known from Cyprus (e.g., Ikosi
1991-2:64, fig. 44).
Context: not published.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 81-1044. Now in Haifa, museum of
ancient art (?).
Literature: Elgavish 1967 (no page nos.).
[Fig. 9:7].
5.VI.5.12. Two fragments from Shiqmona: a hollow base
(similar to those of the "dea Tyria") and a female moulded
head. They may belong to the same figurine (as claimed in
the publication), but this is not certain. The head has a peg
and long, twisted side-locks that reach the shoulders.
Context: locus 282, reg. no. 4417146170 (?).
Place: Romema, IAA 81-1042.
Literature: Zemer 1991:25, no. 32.
5.VI.5.13. A solid female head from Shiqmona. It is mould-
made and has short side-locks, descending behind the ears.
There are 2-3 rows of small curls above the forehead. The
nose is damaged. Height: 55 mm.
Note: cf. heads from Shiqmona and Gile'am, nos. 17-18
(below).
Context: locus 294, reg. no. 6044/69 (?).
Place: Romema, IAA no. 81-641 (not 642).
Literature: Zemer 1991: 25 no. 35.
5.VI.5.14. A moulded female head with a peg from
Shiqmona. It has twisted side-locks, probably similar to
those of figurine 5.VI.2.7 (above), now mostly missing.
Context: locus 47, reg. no. 5599/68 (?).
Place: Romema, IAA no. 81-1040.
Literature: Zemer 1991: 26 no. 38.
5.VI.5.15. A moulded female head and an upper body part
from Shiqmona. It has long side-locks, descending behind
the ears until the shoulders. There are vertical curls above
the forehead. Height: 72 mm. Pink slip and red-brown paint.
Context: locus 666, reg. no. 8058171 (?).
Place: Romema, IAA no. 81-640.
Literature: Zemer 1991: 26 no. 39.
5.VI.5.16. A female head with a peg from Shiqmona. It is
mould-made, but the details in the published drawing are not
clear. Height: 63 mm.
Context: not published.
Place: Haifa, museum of ancient art no. 2353.
Literature: Zemer 1991: 25,79, no. 34.
5.VI.5.17. A moulded female head and an upper body part
from Shiqmona. The left arm lies on the chest. The face is
beautiful, with vertical curls and representations of ears. The
head is very similar to head no. 18 (below).
Context: not published.
Literature: Elgavish 1967 (without page numbers).
[Fig. 9:8]
5.VI.5.18. A moulded female head from Shiqmona. It is
similar to head no. 17 (above).
Context: not published.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 65-2355.
Literature: Elgavish 1967 (the large photograph, no page
nos.); Negev 1972:289 photograph; Holland 1975: AIX.f.1;
Elgavish 1978, EAEHL IV:1102; Engle 1979: type VIII:6;
perhaps also Elgavish 1994: fig. 45 (the last may be
5.VI.5.16?).
5.VI.5.19. A moulded female head and an upper body part
from an unknown origin (supposedly from Ma'alul, a village
west of Nazareth). The hands lie on the chest. There are
long side-locks, somewhat similar to the shape of an
earlobe, and vertical curls above the forehead. Height: 91
mm.
Context: unknown.
Place: Rockefeller 45.257.
Literature: Holland 1975: C.XV.a.11d, addenda, pI. 45:5.
5.VI.5.20. A moulded female head from Tel Keisan. It is
moulded and has a hole at the back. There are long side-
locks, descending behind the ears. Red and white paint.
Note: a fragment of a base with feet was found with this
head. Paraire thought it is an Egyptian type of head - but
"Egyptian" features are common in Phoenician art in
general. Reg. no. 6.146 + 6.104.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan 1:333-334, pI. 102:5.
5.VI.5.21. A hollow female head from Tel Keisan. It is
moulded and has the remains of red paint. Reg. no. 3.672.
Context: debris of level IVb, 6th century BC.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:6.
5.VI.5.22. A solid female head from Tel Keisan. It has long
side-locks but no representation of ears. There are remains
of red paint. Reg. no. 4.049.
Context: level IVb, 7th century BC (?).
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:19.
5.VI.5.23. A hollow male head from Tel Keisan. It is moulded
and has a long beard. Paraire defined the style as Assyrian.
Reg. no. 6.135.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:1O.
5.VI.5.24. A fragment of a solid (?) head from Tel Keisan. It
shows a disk and two snakes between schematic feathers.
Reg. no. 6.139.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:9.
5.VI.5.25. A nearly whole body from Tel Keisan. It is hollow
and wheel-made. The right hand held a dagger (?). The
fingers are shown by incisions. A band is applied on the
back. Reg. no. 6.093.
Context: level Vllb, ca. 9th century BC.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 79-245.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:3.
5.VI.5.26. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is hollow and
hand-made. The arms are broken. Reg. no. 6.529.
Context: not stratified.
284
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:2.
5.VI.5.27. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is hollow and
wheel-made. The right hand holds a bird (?), the other rests
on the hip. Reg. no. 5.302.
Context: level IVb, ca. 7th century BC.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:16.
5.VI.5.28. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is hollow and
wheel-made. It probably depicted a woman holding a bird.
Reg. no. 5.090.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:17.
5.VI.5.29. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is hollow and
wheel-made. It probably depicted a woman holding
something. Part of the peg remained. Reg. no. 2.918.
Context: surface find.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:18.
5.VI.5.30. A base fragment from Tel Keisan. It shows part of
the feet. Wheel-made. Reg. no. 2.406.
Context: not stratified.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:7.
5.VI.5.31. A base fragment from Tel Keisan. It shows part of
the feet. Wheel-made. Reg. no. 3.099.
Context: level VI, ca. 9th century BC (?).
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:8.
5.VI.5.32. A base fragment from Tel Keisan. It is wheel-
made, but resembles type 5.VI.1 and not bases nos. 30-31
above (cf. also a monkey figurine with a similar base, Keisan
I: pI. 104:39). Reg. no. 4.190.
Context: level V, 8th-7th centuries BC.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:24.
5.VI.5.33. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is solid and
wheel-made. The figure is standing, hands along the body
and a bird on one hand. Reg. no. 6.331.
Context: level IX.b, 11th century BC.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:14.
5.VI.5.34. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. It is solid and
hand-made. It shows a woman sitting on a chair (?) with two
supporting animals (?). Reg. no. 6.138.
Context: not stratified.
Place: Romema, IAA no. 79-247.
Note: this fragment may be part of a vessel or a stand, and
not a free-standing figurine.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 103:15.
5.VI.5.35. A body fragment from Tel Keisan. Only the arm
survived, with incised fingers. Reg. no. 2.173.
Context: levels VI-V, ca. 9th-8th centuries BC (?).
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:4.
5.VI.5.36. A hollow head from Kabri. It is moulded and has
vertical curls. Gray ware. Reg. no. 3117.
Context: locus 824.
Literature: Oren, R. 1994: fig. 20:1.
5.VI.5.37. A hollow head from Kabri. It is moulded and has
vertical curls. There are large ears and long side-locks. Few
traces of red paint survived. Reg. no. 5018/100.
Context: locus 1915.
Literature: Oren, R. 1994:33, fig. 20:2.
5.VI.5.38. A hollow (?) female head from Kabri. It has long
side-locks reaching the shoulders. The ears are small. The
face is covered with red paint and there are red bands on the
neck. Orange ware with white slip. Reg. no. 2292/100.
Context: locus 890.
Literature: Oren, R. 1994: fig. 20:3.
5.VI.5.39. A hollow female body fragment from Kabri. The
hands hold the breasts (the thumbs are represented).
Orange ware and white slip. There are remains of red paint
and black bands. Reg. no. 3401/100.
Context: locus 890.
Literature: Oren, R. 1994: fig. 20:5.
5.VI.5.40. A body fragment from Kabri. There are remains of
red paint and black bands. Orange ware with white slip. Reg.
no. 3626/100.
Context: locus 1337.
Literature: Oren, R. 1994:33, fig. 20:6.
5.VI.5.41. A hollow body-fragment from Kabri. A hand and a
drum remained. The belly is full, indicating pregnancy. There
are remains of red and black paint. Reg. no. 3528/100.
Context: locus 1324.
Literature: Oren, R. 1994: fig. 20:7.
5.VI.5.42. A solid head from Tel Keisan. It is hand-made and
similar to heads of type 5.IV.3, but is dated to the Persian
period. Reg. no. TK.35/20.
Literature: Paraire in: Keisan I: pI. 102:1.
5.VI.6: Various Figurines of unknown Origin
5.VI.6.1. A hollow head with a hole at the back. Reg. no.
H.713.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Hecht museum,
University of Haifa.
5.VI.6.2. A hollow female head with a hole at the back. It has
"earlobe" shaped side-locks. Reg. no. H.1912.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Hecht museum,
University of Haifa.
5.VI.6.3. A hollow feamle head with a hole at the back. It has
"earlobe" shaped side-locks (one is broken). Reg. no.
H.2053.
Literature: not yet published, courtesy of the Hecht museum,
University of Haifa.
5.VI.6.4-5. Two hollow female heads with "earlobe" shaped
side-locks.
Literature: Deutsch 1988b: nos. 505-506.
5.VI.6.6. A whole figurine of a woman playing a drum. She
holds the drum perpendicular to her body. The head has no
side-locks (cf. type 5.VI.2?).
Literature: Deutsch 1989b: no. 276.
5.VI.6.7. A moulded head of type 5.111 (?). It has ears and
simple side-locks that reach the shoulders. White-wash.
Height: 57 mm.
Place: the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, no. 545.
Literature: courtesy of the Hebrew University.
285
5.VII: Other Figurines
5.VII.1: Persian - Period Figurines
I have listed below figurines which are dated to the Persian
period, or belong to well-defined types of that period. There
are also a few even later figurines. All these figurines were
included in Holland's thesis, and were checked only in order
to verify that they have no relation with the JPF (for Persian
period figurines from Israel see Stern 1973; 1989 and
chapter X.7.4 above).
Since these figurines are not related to the JPF, I have given
the minimum details regarding each figurine, and usually
only one reference - to the original publication (other than to
Holland's thesis).
5.VII.1.1. A male head from Ashdod. Holland 1975:
C.XIV.d.2.
Original publication: Ashdod I: pI. 58:7, fig. 65:3.
5.VII.1.2. A female plaque figurine from Beth Shean. Holland
1975: C.XV.a.4.
Original publication: Rowe 1940: pI. 24: 2 (1); James 1966:
fig. 116:6. For a comparison from Dor cf. Stern 1992:
photograph 71.
5.VII.1.3. A dressed, sitting woman from Beth Shean. It is
double-moulded. Holland 1975: C.xV.a.5.
Original publication: Rowe 1940: pI. 24:2 (2); James 1966:
fig. 116:3. For a comparison from Dor cf. Stern 1992:
photograph 71.
5.VII.1.4. A head from Hazor. Level /I. Reg. no. G.457/1,
locus 10033. Holland 1975: AXII.p.4.
Original publication: Hazor III-IV: pI. 258:13.
5.VII.1.5. A hollow body-fragment from Lachish. The hands
lie on the lower belly. Reg. no. 3514. Holland 1975: C.III.b.1.
Original publication: Lachish III: pI. 33:10.
5.VII.1.6. A hollow body-fragment from Lachish. It shows a
pregnant woman. Holland 1975: C.III.b.2.
Original publication: Lachish III: pI. 32:4.
5.VII.1.7. A fragment of a plaque figurine from Lachish.
Surface find. Holland 1975: C.XIV.d.8.
Original publication: Lachish /II: pI. 33:6.
5.VII.1.8. A male head with a beard from Machmish. Holland
1975: AXII.L2.
Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 9b.
5.VII.1.9. A whole figurine from Machmish. It depicts a
sitting man, holding his beard with one hand. Hollow, double
mould. Holland 1975: AXV.a.11.
Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 10a; also EAEHL
11:326 left (Hebrew).
5.VII.1.10. A whole figurine from Machmish. It is similar to
figurine no. 9 (above). Holland 1975: A.XV.a.11a.
Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 10a.
5.V/I.1.11. A whole figurine from Machmish. It depicts a
young woman. Hollow, double mould. Holland 1975:
AXV.a.11b.
Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 10c.
5.VII.1.12. A figurine of a woman and a suckling child from
Machmish. Hollow, double mould. Holland 1975:
AXV.a.11 c.
Original publication: Avigad 1960: pI. 11c.
5.VII.1.13. A male head with a high hat from Samaria.
Holland 1975: AXll.q.5.
Original publication: Samaria I: pI. 75k.
5.VII.1.14. A body fragment of a man which carries a discus
from Samaria. Holland 1975: AX.g.5.
Original publication: Samaria I: pI. 75q.
5.VII.1.15. A figurine of a man holding his beard with one
hand from Samaria. Holland 1975: B.lIl.b.3.
Original publication: Samaria I: pI. 75n, Reg. no. 3092.
5.VII.1.16. A male head with a beard from Tell es-Safi.
Holland 1975: AXII.L.3.
5.VII.1.17. A figurine of a hollow woman standing on a base
from Tell es-Safi. Holland 1975: AXlll.a.8.
Original publication: Bliss and Macalister 1902: pI. 70:11.
5.VII.1.18. A male head with a beard from Tell es-Safi.
Holland 1975: AXlIl.a.9.
Original publication: Bliss and Macalister 1902: pI. 70:12.
5.VII.1.19. A fragment of feet and body from Tell Abu-
Hawwam. Holland 1975: CXl.e.5.
Place: Rockefeller, 34.232.
Original publication: Hamilton 1935:17, no. 28.
5.VII.1.20. A nearly whole figurine of a pregnant woman
from Tel Megadim. The hands lie along the body. Holland
1975: AXIV.b.1.
5.VII.1.21. A body fragment from Tel Erani. The hands lie
along the body. Holland 1975: C.IV.b.3.
Original publication: Ciasca 1962: pI. 7:7.
5.VII.1.22. Three fragments of hollow figurines made in a
double mould, from Tel Erani. Holland 1975: C.XIV.d.6.
Original publication: Ciasca 1962: pI. 6:6; Ciasca 1963: pI.
15.
5.VII.1.23. A hollow body from Tel Erani. The left hand lies
on the hip. Holland 1975: C.XV. b.1.
5.VII.2: Figurines of Other Periods or Other
Materials
General note: I have listed below figurines of stone, bone
and other materials, which Holland included in his thesis
(occasionally as regular pillar-figurines). I have also added
figurines that, during the years following Holland's thesis
(1975), were dated clearly to periods other than the Iron Age
(and are therefore not related to the JPF). Again, the
folloWing list includes the minimal number of details.
I have not included a few unidentified fragments, classified
under type P by Holland (except P.1I1.12, following
correspondence with the Emory museum where this
fragment is stored).
5.VII.2.1. A figurine made of ivory from Gezer. Holland 1975:
C.IV.b.4.
286
Original publication: Gezer II: pI. 221:18.
5.VII.2.2. A figurine made of ivory from Gezer. Holland 1975:
C.IV.b.5.
Original publication: Gezer II: pI. 221:17.
5.VII.2.3. A figurine from Hazor. It probably depicts an
animal's leg and not a human figure. Holland 1975:
AXVl.b.16.
Original publication: Hazor III-IV: pI. 219:32.
5.VII.2.4. A figurine from Jericho. It is dated to the Pre-
Pottery Neolithic period. Holland 1975: AXVll.b.2.
Original publication: Jericho IV: fig. 224:3.
5.VII.2.5. A figurine made of pumice from Megiddo. Holland
1975: AXlIl.c.7.
Original publication: May 1935: pI. 33:M.3342.
5.VII.2.6. A figurine made of limestone from Megiddo.
Holland 1975: AXa.7.
Original publication: May 1935: pI. 32:M.4418.
5.VIII: Moulds
I have already included a few moulds among the different
types of figurine, to which they belong. These are: 5.V.1.38
from Ta'anakh; 5.V.2.2 from Gezer; 5.V.5.1 from Megiddo;
5.V.8.14 from Gezer; and 5.V.9.19-21 from Tel Batash.
Holland put the seal from Ramat Rahel among the moulds.
There is no proof that this seal was used as a mould for
figurines in general, and JPF in particular (for the seal see
RR 11:42, pI. 25:3-5; Holland 1975: N.lIl.a.1). Thus, I have
not discussed this artifact here.
5.VIII.1. A mould of a female head from Beth Shemesh.
There are two rows of large, rounded curls. The side-locks
probably have similar curls and reach the height of the
mouth. Red clay. Reg. no. 33-4-80. Season 1933.
Context: room 377 in a bUilding (rooms 381, 390). 8th
century BC?
Literature: AS 111:65, pI. 22:5; fig. 4; Holland 1975: N.ll.a.1.
5.VIII.2. A mould of a female head from Lachish. There are
some incised lines above the forehead. The details of the
side-locks are not clear in the photographs. The excavators
thought that the retouching (after the moulding) was not
finished, thus explaining the lack of fine details for the eyes
and the curls. Reg. no. 7274.
Context: dlx, unstratified.
Place: Rockefeller 39.833, in exhibition.
Literature: Lachish III: pI. 31:14; Holland 1975: vol. 11:316,
N.ll.a.3. ~ 5.VIII.13. A mould of a female head from Tell Gemmeh. It is
5.VIII.3. A mould of a female head and an upper body part
from Lachish. There is a diadem on the forehead and
"Hathor" horns above the head, with a feather (?) in between.
The figure carries a necklace with a pendant and probably
holds her breasts with her hands.
Context: area 500, but the exact location is not clear.
Literature: Lachish IV: pI. 48:1-3; Holland 1975: N.l.a.3.
5.VIII.4. A mould for a lower body of a plaque-figurine from
Tell en-Nasbeh. The legs are decorated with rings and the
feet turn forward. There are ridges of dress (?) on the belly
(the excavators thought that these are ropes, symbolizing
captured enemies). Parts of the arms survived, and they
were probably both placed on the chest. There are also
armlets.
Context: a fill oLitside a house in square AP/22.
Note: the mould is similar to some of the figurines of type
5.V.1, but an exact classification is impossible since the
head is missing.
Literature: TN 1:300, pI. 87:3, fig. 4; Holland 1975: N.l.a.5.
5.VIII.5. A mould of a female head from Tawilan. It has a
complex hairdress, with side-locks until the shoulders.
Context: Iron Age II, other details not published.
Place: Amman.
Literature: Holland 1975: N.l.a.7, fig. 75:3, pI. 40:3.
5.VIII.6-8. Three moulds of female heads from Amman. One
mould is broken in a half. All have representations of ears
and long side-locks. They resemble heads of Transjordanian
figurines (app. 4 above), but are not identical to any specific
head.
Context: tomb F, end of the Iron Age period (?).
Place: Amman?
Literature: Dornemann 1983:132-134, fig. 88:1-3.
5.VIII.9. A mould of a female head from Tell Deir 'Alia. It has
horizontal lines and large, rounded curls above the forehead
(cf. 5.111.7.33, 5.111.7.29 for general comparisons). The side-
locks reach the shoulders.
Context: not published.
Literature: Franken 1960: pI. 14b; Holland 1975: N.ll.b.1, fig.
68:6.
5.VIII.10. A mould of a female head from Tell Deir 'Alia. It
has a high "hat" (not applied) with horizontal and zigzag
lines. There is a necklace and a representation of the ears.
Context: not published.
Literature: Franken 1961, VT 11/4: pI. 19; Franken 1963: pI.
15b; Holland 1975: N.ll.a.1.
5.VIII.11. A mould of a female head from' an unknown origin,
supposedly from Transjordan. Either a drawing or a
photograph was not published. It has two twisted side-locks
that reach the shoulders.
Context: unknown.
Place: Haifa, museum of ancient Art no. 3566.
Literature: Zemer 1991: no. 36.
5.VIII.12. A mould of a female head from Ashdod. It has a
triangular hairdress (cf. 5.111.8.1, 5.111.8.3 above). The hands
hold the breasts.
Context: area D, surface find.
Literature: Ashdod I: fig. 46:3, pI. 27:1; Ashdod II-II:125f,
128; Holland 1975: N.l.a.1.
badly broken. The side-locks probably reach the shoulders.
(cf. the 5.111 types).
Context: BZ.201, a large court in a building complex of
Petrie's "26th dynasty" city. The court is disturbed by later
pits.
287
Literature: Petrie 1928: pI. 36:19; Holland 1975: vol. 11:316-
317, N.ll.b.2.
5.VIII.14. A mould of a female head from Tell Gemmeh. It
has three rows of little curls above the forehead.
Context: GC.189, a court (or a room) in a bUilding complex
that includes rooms GO, GR. Petrie's "20th dynasty" city.
This level was dated by Kenyon to the 10th century BC., and
by Holland to the 9th-8th centuries BC.
Literature: Petrie 1928:18, pI. 36:6; Holland 1975: pI. 40:4,
N.ll.a.2.
5.VIII.15. A mould of a plaque figurine from Samaria (broken
into two fragments). It depicts a woman holding a child on
her knee. She wears a diadem. Reg. no. C.1013 (cf. 5.V.7.4,
5.V.7.37 above).
Context: E.207, 8th century BC.
Literature: Samaria III: cat. no. 8, pI. 12:7; Holland 1975:
C.VII.a.5, fig. 19:9.
5.VIII.16. A mould of a female head from Megiddo. The ears
are represented and there are vertical curls, and probably
simple side-locks reaching the shoulders. Reg. no. 1853.
Context: near tomb 59, from a mixed assemblage.
Literature: GUy 1938: pI. 176:11; Holland 1975: N.ll.b.4.
5.VIII.17. A mould of a female head from Megiddo. There
are long side-locks.
Context: near tomb 59, in a mixed assemblage.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 158:c; Holland 1975:
N.ll.b.5.
5.VIII.18. A mould of a female head from Megiddo. There
are long side-locks with incised horizontal lines; cf. heads of
type 5.111.6 (above).
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 157; Holland 1975:
N.ll.b.6.
5.VIII.19. A mould of a plaque-figurine from Megiddo. The
body is nearly whole. The hands hold the breasts and the
fingers are marked. There is a representation of a dress,
decorated with incised lines and dots on the lower belly. The
woman wears rings on her ankles.
Context: the "palace", group B.
Literature: Schumacher 1908: pI. 158:b, pI. 32:d; Holland
1975: N.l.a.4.
5.VIII.20. A mould of a female head from Megiddo. The peg
is preserved. There are long side-locks that reach the
shoulders and incised vertical lines above the forehead.
Context: locus 1270 in square P/8. This is a narrow room
(storeroom?) in a house (rooms 1499, 1264, 1259). Level II.
Literature: May 1935: pI. 23:M.4117; Holland 1975: N.ll.b.4;
Engle 1979: type VIII:205.
5.VIII.21. A mould of a female head from an unknown origin.
It has vertical lines above the forehead. It is somewhat
similar, but not identical, to heads from Transjordan.
Place: Eretz-Israel museum, Tel Aviv, no. 114/16.
MHP.7889.
Literature: Deutsch 1989b: 104 no. 273.
 Garwood,P. 21. Mayes,AH.D. 5.
Indexes Gates, C.
Geller, M.I
73.
25, 70.
Ikeda, Y.
Ulan, Z.
76n.6.
7,43.
Mazar, A 7-8, 18,40, 43, 64, 69 n.
1,75.
George, AR 73. Ioannides, G.C. 54. Mazar, B. 5 n. 2, 7-8,17,74.
Gerstenberger, E.S. 78. Isserlin, B.S.J. 25,32. Mazar, Eilat 8,44, 54.
Bloom, Joanne B. 5. De-Vaux, R 14,73.
1. Index of Authors 1 Boardman, J. 9. De-Wette, W.M.L. 25.
Gesell, Geraldine C. 28 n. 1, 71. McCarthy, D.J. 5.
Geva, Shulamit 7 n. 6, 9. Jacobs, P. 7,62,66. Meerschaert, Camille 25,35,36,53.
Bohm, Stephanie 25,71. Dearman, J.A. 18,76 n. 6. Gilula, M. 27. Jacobsen, Th. 79. Mendenhall, G.E. 76 n. 6.
A-Campo, AL. 25. Bonano, A 21,75 n. 3. Deboys, D.G. 43. Ginsberg, H.L. 43.
Deem, A 76.
Jeremias, J. 17,54,75. Meshel, Z. 27.
Abusch, T. 71. Borger, R 68. Gitin, S. 8,25,27, 32,43, 76 n. 6. Jericke, D. 40. Mettinger, TN.D. 21 n. 19,78.
Ackerman, Susan 26. Borowski, O. 62. Delcor, M. 76 n. 5.
Giveon, R 35. Jones, G. 43 Meyers, Carol. 25,35-36,49.
Aharoni, Y. 5, 7, 8, 13, 13 n, 6, 16, Bourke, H. 59. Dever, W.G. 18, 19,21,22,22 n. 21,
Gladigow, B. 79. Milik, IT. 7.
17 n. 12,21,24,49,53,73,78. Bowden, H. 9. 27,54,59,72-74,76,76 n. 6.
Glueck, N. 35. Miller, P.D. 18, 74.
Ahituv, Sh. 44. Brandes, M 56. Diakonoff, I.M 6.
Goldberg, Naomi R 25, 25 n. 26. Kallai, Z. 43. Mitchell, TC. 18,36.
Ahlstrom, G.W 7 n. 5, 14, 18, 18 n. 14 Brandl, B. 7 n. 7, 9,43. Dicou, B. 25 n. 25.
Gophna, R 13,29, 32,43. KamIah, Jens. 79. Mittmann, S. 4,27,43.
27,27 n. 28,44 n. 2, 75-76. Bretschneider, J. 23, 69 n. 1. Dietrich, W 21 n. 19,27, 58, 66, 76
Goren, Y. 49,49 n. 1,55. Karageorghis, V. 25, 33, 36, 71, 81 Mommsen, H. 7.
Albertz, R 26. Briend, I 18, 74. n. 6,78-79.
Gorg, M. 65, 76 n. 5. addenda. Montgomery, J.A. 5,6,6 n. 3.
Albright, WF. 10,11, 12, 13, 15-16,21, Brinkman, IA 6. Dion, P.E. 31,44. Goring, Elisabeth 25. Keel, O. 18, 20, 23, 24, 27, 32, Moorey, P.RS. 18,49, 78.
24,49,53, 73, 78. Bron, F. 22. Dobbs-Allsop, F.W. 44 n. 3. Grant, E. 40,47. 36,50-51,57,57 n. 1,65,74.. Morris, B. 21,77-78.
Alroth, Brita. 17, 25, 62, 69, 71, 77, Broshi, M. 47. Doermann, RW. 7. Gray, I 5,6,6 n. 3. Kelley, C.P 56. Morris, Sarah P. 53, 71.
79. Brown, S. 53. Dohmen, C. 21 n. 19. Green, A 25,68,70-71. Kelm, G.L. 7,8. Muhly, J.D. 78.
Alt, A 43-44,45 n. 4. Bulbach, SW. 43. Donatelli, Laura. 79. Green, AR 4, 6. Kelso, IL. 11,16,49-53. Mulder, MI 26.
Ammerman. Rebecca M. 25, 51-52, 53, Burkert, W. 71. Donner, H. 4. Green, S.W 44. Kempinski, A 6 n. 4, 8,43. Musberg, R 79.
69, 71, 76 n. 5, 78. Burstein, S.M 5. Domemann, RH. 25, 30. Grimal, N.C. 70.
Dothan, T 8,25, 33, 43. Kenyon, KM. 7-8, 13, 15-17, 19, 40,
Amiran, R 29. Burrows, M. 12, 73, 74, 77. Gubel, E. 25, 28 n. 1, 30, 32, 35-
Driver, S.R 12, 75. 59,61,63,73-74. Na'aman, N. 4-6, 7 n. 7, 8, 40, 42 n. 8,
Amit, D. 7,43. 36,53,71. Kertesz, Trude 54 n. 2. 43-44,44 n. 2,46,47 n. 9.
Amr, Al 17,24. Caquot, A 24. Duff, AI. 21.
Gudison, Lucy 21. Kippenberg, H.G. 21,23. Nadelman, Y. 17,54,59.
Carless-Hulin, Linda S. 21,23,25,71 n. 4. Duncan, IG. 74.
Ardener, Shirley 25. Gunneweg, I 27. Kitchen, K.A. 4, 5, 5 n. 2. Nakhai, B.P. 61.
Auerbach, Elise 71,75. Caubet, Annie 25, 32, 35-36, 50, 52, 53, Durkheim, E. 80.
Gurney,O.R 70. Klein, RW. 43. Naveh, J. 27,44.
Avigad, N. 7, 8. 53 n. 10,71.
Edwards, O. 4, 6. Kletter, R 22, 41, 43 n. 1, 44-45, Negbi, Ora 49, 79.
Ayalon, E. 27. Cazelles, H. 6. Hachlili, Rachel 13-14,51. 48-49. Nelson, RD. 52.
Chadderdon, T.I 21. Eicher, J.B. 26.
Hagg, E. 21 n. 19,25. Kloner, A 49. Netzer, E. 7,9,40,64.
Badre, Leila. 25. Chadwich, IR 7,47. Eitam, D. 43.
Hackett, J.A. 25 n. 26. Koch, K 76 n. 6. Nicholls, RV. 25,51,51 n. 7,52.
Cherry, J.F. 44. Eitan, A 8, 43.
Bahat, D. 25. Hadley, Judith M. 22,27,68, 76 n. 6. Kochavi, M. 7,8. Nicholson, E.W. 5.
Bailey, DW. 18, 74. Childs, B.S. 4. Elat, M. 5,46.
Hadzisteliou-Price, Theodora 28 n. 1, 75 Kochman, M 8. Niemeier, W.D. 9.
Bar-Adon, P. 7,47. Cholidis, Nadja 66. Elgavish, J. 35. n.3.
Elitzur, y. 5. Koenig, Y. 70. Noblecourt, D. 25, 68.
Barkay, G. 4, 5, 7-8, 8 n. 8, 18, 41, Ciasca, Antonia 13. Hagg, R 28 n. 1. Konkel, AH. 5. Noordhuizen, D. 17.
Clark, G.A. 21. Emerton, IA 27, 76 n. 6. Haiman, M. 40.
54,57-58,58 n. 3, 59, 74-75, 79. Kutsch, E. 6. North, R. 5-6, 27.
Clarke, D.L. 44. Engle, J.R 11 n. 1, 16, 16 n. 11, 17, Hallo, WW. 73,78-79.
Barnes, Ruth 26. Kyle, M.G. 19,75,77. Noth, M. 5,43, 76 n. 6.
Barrelet, M.T. 25. Clements, RE. 5. 17 n. 12, 18,22-23,28,29,38,39, Halpern, B. 18.
39 n. 19,40-41,41 n. 5, 50-51, 58, Kyle-McCarter, P. 76 n. 6. Nylander, C. 56.
Barrett, J.C. 63, 78. Clennont-Ganneau, Ch. 10.
Handy, L.K 75.
Bartlett, IR 25 n. 25. Coher, R 5. 76.
Haran, M. 12,18. Laato, A 43. Oates, Jane. 6.
Beck, Pirhiya 22,25,27,31-32,34,62, Cohen, Rudolph. 8, 44, 62, 78-79. Eph'al, I. 7.
Harris, K 25 n. 26. Lagro, T 17. Ockinga, B. 79.
Colbow, Gudrun 25. Eshel, H. 7,8.
65,78-79. Heaton, E.W. 14,74, 77. Lambert, WG. 2. O'Connor, M. 27.
Becking, B. 4, 7 n. 7,43. Collombier, AM 9. Eshel, I. 7 n. 6, 8, 9, 81 addenda.
Hennary, Antoine 25, 50, 71. Lapp,P.W 13,35. Oded, B. 6, 75.
Connelly, lB. 25,31,79.
Beer, Cecilia. 25, 35, 53. Herr, L.G. 25 n. 25. Leclant, I 76n.5. Ofer, A 7,47.
Begg, C.T 6. Conrad, D. 25, 78, 79 n. 8. Fantar, M.H. 76 n. 5. Herzog, Z. 7, 8,40, 64. Lee, TG. 79. Olyan, S.M 27 n. 28, 76 n. 6.
Beit-Arieh, Y. 7,8,44,50 n. 3,62. Contenau, G. 10. Fargo, V.M. 7. Hestrin, Ruth 18, 76, 76 n. 6. Lemaire, A 22, 27, 69, 76, 76 n. 5, Oppenheim, AL. 79.
Ben-Arieh, Sarah. 25,78. Coogan, M.D. 18. Ferron, I 36. Higgins, RA 25, 53. 76n.6. Oren, E.D. 7,9,25.
Berkeley (Father) 10. Cook, RM 9. Finkelstein, I. 7, 43, 47. Hirschon, R. 25. Lemche, N.P. 21 n. 19,74. Orlinski, H.M. 5.
Berlinerblau, J. 26. Cooper, IS. 44. Fleming, S. 49,78. Hodder, I. 44. Linder, E. 25,46. Oman, Tallay 32 n. 6,78.
Courtois, IS. 33. Fowler, MD. 20,21,57,73,77.
Betlyon, IW. 76 n. 6. Holladay, IS. 7 n. 5, 19, 20, 26, 57, 59, Lipinski, E. 6,23, 68-69. Orphanides, AG. 20, 71 n. 5, 74.
Best, I 76 n. 6. Cresson, B.C. 8. Frame, G. 5. 61,63-64, 74, 76, 78. Liverani, M 44. Osborne, R 71.
Bhattacharya, D.K 21, 21 n. 18. Cross, F.M 7,21. Franken, H.I 14,17,59,63,73-74,76. Holland, T.A. 11, 11 n. 11, 13, 15, 16, Ljung, I. 76n.6.
Crouwel, I 20. Franken-Battefshill, C.A. 14,73-74,76.
Bienkowski, P. 25,25 n. 25. 16 n. 10, 16 n. 11, 20, 22-24, 28, Loretz, O. 25,27,58,76 n. 6,79. Parpola, S. 52.
Biran, A 7, 8. Crowfoot,J.W. 62 n. 11. Frazer, I 10,80. 30, 32, 36, 36 n. 10, 37, 38, 38 n. Lowery, RH. 5,43. Patai, R 14, 14 n. 7, 14 n. 8, 15,
Bird, Philis. 18,25 n. 26. Culican, W 25, 35, 53, 69 n. 1. Frettloh, Magdalene L. 76 n. 6. 16,39, 39 n. 18, 39 n. 19, 50, 54, Lukonin, V.G. 6. 16,22,49,53, 75-76.
Bisi, Anna Maria. 25, 36, 53, 71. Curtis, E.L. 6 n. 3. Frevel, C. 81 addenda. 59,63,65-66,74-75,78. Lundquist, IM 61. Paul, S.M 21.
Black, J. 25, 70. Curtis, E.M. 79. Fritz, V. 18. Holloway,S.W 19,70. Peltenburg, E.I 54.
Bliss, F.J. 70. Frost, S.B. 6. Homes-Frederiqc,D. 30,32. Macalister, RAS. 10, 54, 70, 74. Perlman, I. 7.
Bloch-Smith, Elizabeth.M. 18,40,58, 76. Dagan, Y. 7-8,42 n. 8,43. Frymer-Kensky, Tikva 25, 76 n. 6.
Honor, L.L. 4. Mackenzie, D. 10, 37, 57. Perlman, S.M. 44.
Blocher, F. 25, 75. Dandamayev, M.A. 6.
Hooke, S.H. 12, 74, 77. Madsen, AL. 6 n. 3. Petrie, WM.F. 33.
Davies, G.L. 7 n. 5. Gadon, Elinor 25,49, 76. Hom, S.H. 5 n. 2. Malamat, A 4-6, 8,44. Pettey, RI 18-19,76 n. 6.
Davila, J.R 76 n. 5. Galil, G. 4-6, 6 n. 4, 7, 43-44.
Hubner, U. 19, 50-51, 54, 73-74, 76 Malinowski, B. 80. Phytian-Adams, M.A. 75.
1 The indexses refer to the text (p. 4-81). Daviau, P.M 31. Galling, K 12.
n.6. Margalith, O. 76 n. 5, 76 n. 6. Pilali-Papasteriou, Angeliki 21,25.
The appendixes are not included. A few Day, J. 74, 76 n. 5, 76 n. 6. Gamer-Wallert, I. 25, 68.
Day, Peggy L. 25 n. 26, 76, 76 n. 5. Hutter, M. 5 n. 2. Matsushima, E. 70,79. Pilz, E. 11, 26, 40, 75.
scholars are missing from the index Ganzman, 25,53, 72, 79.
Hvidberg-Hansen, F.O. 69, 76, 76 n. 5, 76 Mauss, M. 80. Pinch, Geraldine 25, 50, 54 n. 2, 68, 79.
because of the use of abbreveations (such De-Groot, A 47. Garfinkel, Y. 7,44,47,47 n. 9.
n.6. May, IG. 12,73-74. Posener-Krieger, P. 50, 68.
as Lachish ill, TN I, TBM ill). De-Miroschedji, P. 28 n. 1.

288 289
 Prag, K. 16 n. 10. Teixidor, J. 69. Yisrael, Y. 44,62,78-79. Cambridge(U.K.) 81 n. 9 46-47,47 n. 9,48-49,52, 55, 59,
Price, Theodora H. 25. Teubal, Savina. 25-26,49, 76. Yon, Marguerite 25, 32, 35-36, 53, 53 n. Cana'an 10. 61-62,62 n. 10,62 n. 11,63,65, Qitmit 44,62,78-79.
Pritchard, J.B. 11 n. 1, 12, 13, 25, 35, Thiele, E.R 1. 10,71. Carchemish(Syria) 6. 66, 74, 76, 78-79, 81 addenda.
40,53,62,72-74,78. Thorely, J.P. 11, 16,49,50,51,52-53. Young, 1. 44 n. 3. Chichen Iche 59. Jordan valley 31,33. Ramat Rahel 7-8, 13-14, 18, 26, 47 n. 9,
Puech, E. 69. Tigai, J.H. 18,76 n. 6, 77. Chitroi 19 Judah 4-11, 13, 15-16, 18, 19 n. 16,20, 48,52,73.
Tooley,Angela M. 68, 73. Zadok,R 5. City of David (specific part of Jerusalem) 22,24,26,28, 31-32, 36-38,40, Ramot 7,17,47,63.
Rainey, AF. 5, 5 n. 2, 6-8, 43. Toombs, L.E. 7. Zawadzki, S. 6. 8. 41, 43-48, 50, 52, 54, 58, 58 n. Romema (Jerusalem) 59.
Reed, WL. 14, 16, 19,22, 76, 76 n. Tosi, M. 26 n. 27. Zeeb,F. 76 n. 6. Coastal plain (of Israel) 9, 13, 15, 32-33, 3,61-62,65-68, 71-73, 75, 75 n. Ruqeish 9,25,
6. Tubb, J.N. 10. Zevit, Z. 27. 35-37,41,44,45-46. 4,76-79.
Reese, D.S. 9. Tufnell, Olga 13. Zimansky, P. 71. Cyprus 11-12,23,25,28,28 n. 1, 31-33, Judean Desert 7-8,41-42,45,47. Samaria 4-6, 11, 13, 15, 18-19, 20, 27,
Reich, R. 7 n. 7, 43, 44. Tushingham, AD. 7 n. 5. Zimhoni, Orna 7-9. 35-36,53-54, 71, 79. Judean Mountains 7-8,41-42, 45, 47-48, 32,41,43-46,62,62 n. 10,69.
Reifenberg, A 12, 74. Zmirin, Sh. 5,6. 52. Sarepta 25,72.
Renfrew, C. 21,23,25,44, 71. Ucko, P.G. 15,20-21, 55, 58, 73-74, Zorn, lR 7-8,40,41,50,62-64,64 Dan 62. Seville (Spain) 69.
Reuther, Rosmary 25 n. 26. 78. n.14. Dead Sea 43. Kabri 9,36. Shechem 45.
Reviv,H. 5. Uehlinger, C. 18, 20, 23, 24, 27, 50, Zuckerman, B. 76 n. 5. Deir el Medina 26 n. 27. Kh. el-Kom 4, 16,21,27,76,81. Shephelah 5, 7-8, 42-43, 45-47, 47 n. 9,
Reyes, AT. 53. 51,57,57 n. 1,74, 78. Delta (of the Nile) 5. Kh. Geresh 62. 48,49,52.
Riis, P.l 78. Uhelenbrock, lP. 25. Dor 32,51 n. 6, 79. Kh. Hoga 32, 45-46. Shiqmona 36 n. 10.
Ritner, RK. 10, 25, 54, 56, 69, 70, Ussishkin, D. 4,6 n. 4, 7-9, 40, 43, 64. Dura (synagogue) 56. Kh. Rabud 7-8,48. Shomeron (in Hebrew) 27.
81. Kh.Radum 8. Sidon 72, 79.
Rittig, D. 70. Vafoloulou-Richadson, C.E. 53. Edom 31,43-44,62,79. Kisonegra 54. Simeon (land of) 6.
Rofe, A 5, 5 n. 2. Van der-Toorn, K. 23. Egypt 5-6, 13, 25-26, 44, 49, 54, 56, Kition 35. Sinai (desert) 27.
Romano, Irene B. 25, 69, 79. Van Loon, M. 75.
2. Geographic Index- 66,68-70, 79, 81. Kourion 19. Sippar 79.
Rose, M. 22, 26, 27. Van Straten, F. 25,71. Ephraim (land of) 5-6. Kuntillet 'Ajrud 4, 16,21-22,27, 76, 81. Spain 69.
Rowlands, M. 44. Van Winkle, D.W. 5 n. 2. Achzib 25, 72. Ekron 4,8,25,27,32,43,45. Steppes (of Russia) 13.
Rystedt, Eva. 66. Vance, D.B. 69. Aegean 15,25,28,33,41,52-54,71. Elat 43. Lachish 4, 6-9, 11, 13, 14, 22 n. 20, 24, Syria 6,23,25,28,53,69 (coast), 75.
Vandenabeele, Frieda 25, 32, 35-36, 52- Ajrud see: Kuntillet Ajrud. Elteke 4 31, 37,43-48, 52, 57-59, 61, 61 Susa 55.
Sadek, AI. 6. 53. Amathos 35. EnGedi 7-8. n. 9,62,65-66.
Sass, B. 24,78,81. Vargon, Sh. 4. Amman(RabatAmmon) 30,51 n. 6. EnHazevah 44,62,78-79. Lahav see: Tel HalifILahav. Ta'anakh 13,22, 35.
Achmidt-Collinet, Constanze 36. Vernieylen, J. 78. Ammon (land of) 16, 79. Europe 74. Levant 9, 53, 71. Tawilan 31.
Schmitt, G. 4. Versnel, H.S. 10,81. Arabah (valley) 43. Tel Batash (Timnah) 7-8,35,51.
Schniedewind, WM. 5. Vincent, P.H. 10, 54, 75. Arad 7-8, 13 n.6, 17, 18 n. 14,22,26, Gat 43,45, cf. Tel es-Safi Malhata see: TelMalhata Tel Beer Sheba see: Beer Sheba (Tel)
Schroer, S. 24, 27, 76 n. 6. Voigt, MaryM. 10,20-21,21 n. 17, 27, 41,43-44,46-48,61-66,73,78. Geba' 5. Mamila (Jerusalem) 57,59,62. Tel Beit Mirsim 7, 11-13, 15, 18 n. 14,
Schwartz, C. 33, 53. 69,73,81. Aroer (Negev) 8. Gebel el-Zeit 25, 68. Manasseh (land of) 6. 24,34,42,45-47, 52, 58, 61-66,
Seeden, Helga. 69 n. 1. Von Beckerath, 1 5 n. 2. Ashdod 13-15,33,35,41 n. 6,43,45-46, Gebel Qal'ah (Amman) 30 Maresha 49,59,70. 78.
Sease, Chaterine 9. Vorlander, H. 27. 48,73. Gezer 7 n. 7, 10, 11-12,34,43,46, 59. Media 6. Tel Burna 45.
Segal, I. 50. Vrijhof, P.H. 26. Ashkelon 4,25, 32,43. Gibeon 13, 19,42,47,47 n. 8,48 n. 10, Mediterranean (Sea/Area) 21,71,74. Tel Eitun7.
Segal, J.B. 26. Ashtarot Karnayim 14 n.8 49-50, 59, 62, 65. Megiddo 6, 11, 12, 12 n.4, 15-16, 18, 24, Tel el-Ful62.
Seger, J. 7 n. 7. Waardenburg, J. 26. Assur (cf. also Assyria) 5-6, (71 city of). Gileam 36 n. 10. 32-33, 35, 39,41,44-46, 48, 57 Tel el-Ajjul 33.
Seitz, C.R 5. Waldbaum, J.C. 9,44. Assyria (cf. also Assur) 4-6,24. Greece 13, 17,25,28 n. 1, 51, 53, 62 n. 1. Tel el-Mazar (Jordan) 31.
Sellers,O.R 7-8. Walls, N.H. 74, 76. Austalia 52. (world), 71-72 (world), 77. Medma 51. Tel en-Nasbeh 7-8, 11,22 n. 20, 23, 32,
Sellin, E. 35. Ward, W.A. 25, 33, 53. Azeka 6-8,43,44-45. Mesad Hashavyahu 44. 40-42, 46-48, 48. n. 10, 49-50,
Shavit, A 43. Watzinger, C. 12, 74, 75. Azor 43. Mesopotamia 12, 21, 25, 27, 28, 44, 53, 58,61-66.
Shea, W.H. 5 n. 2, 27. Weber, M. 80. Haifa 32. 56,66,68-71, 73, 77,79,81.
Shiloh, Y. 7,61. Weinberg, S.S. 8. Babylon 5-6, 44. Hajj Firuz Tepe 21. Mirgissa 70. Tel el-Oreimeh 36,37.
Skorupski, J. 80-81. Weinfeld, M. 5-6, 8,43. Beer Sheba (Biblical) 5. Haran 6. Mizpah 43, cf.: tell en-Nasbeh. Tel es-Safi (Gat) 32, 43 (Gat), 45 (Gat),
Smelik, K.A.D. 5,5 n. 2. Weippert, H. 8, 18, 24, 43. Beer Sheba (Tel) 7, 7 n. 6, 9, 13 n.6, 16, Hazor 13,18,24,32,41,60,78. Moab 16. 45.
Smith, M.S. 4, 27, 58, 76, 76 n. 5, 76 Weippert, M. 43, 25 n. 25, 66. 17, 31-32, 39-40, 42-43 (valley Hebron 7,47. Mount Nebo 77. Tel Erani (Sheikh Ahmad el Areini) 7, 13,
n.6. Welch, AC. 6. of), 46-48, 58-60, 62, 62 n. 11, Hittite (empire) 70. Moza 7. 15,40,45-46.
Sophocleus, S. 25, 35. Wenning, R 6, 9-10, 19, 20, 44, 58, 63-65,73. Hurru 69. Tel Gat see: Tel Erani.
Sorensen, L.W 25, 35, 53, 71. 65, 74,76-77. Benjamin 5-8,40, 42, 44-45. Nahariya 14, 14 n.8, 24. Tel Gemmeh 15,32, 33-35.
Spalinger, LW. 4-5, 5 n. 2. Westermann, C. 5. Berlin 68. Israel, ancient Kingdomof (northern) 4, 8, Naphtali (land of) 6. Tel Goded see: Tel Judeideh.
Spieckermann, H. 5-6,6 n. 3. Whitt, WD. 18,76 n. 6. Beth Lehem 10,43,47. 11 n. 2, 15, 18, 22, 24, 32, 36, Naukratis 69. Tel HalifILahav 7,42,45,61,66, 79.
Spycket,Agnes 25,49, 53, 55, 66, 71. Beth Shean 35. 40-41, 43, 45-46, 54, 62, 71-72, Near East (Ancient) 9-10, 15, 20, 23, 32, Tel Haror 9, 25, 32.
Wiggermann, F.A.M. 68,70-71,78.
Stadelmann 21. Wiggins, S.A. 22-23, 68, 71, 76, 76 n. Beth Shemesh 7, 10-11, 13, 15-16, 18,20, 76. 44,54,66,73-75,77-78,81. Tel'lra 7-8, 17,34,42,49-50,60, 73.
Stager, L.E. 7, 47. 6. 31,3'7,40,42-43,45-48,50,57- Negev 7-8,27,40,42,44-49. Tel Hesi 7.
Starkey, lL. 7. Wightman, G.D. 7. 60, 62, 64-66. Israel, land of (as modern term) 6, 8-12, Tel Judeideh (Goded) 7,45.
Stern, E. 6 n. 4, 7, 25, 41, 43, 51 Wilford, J.N. 25. Beth Zur 7,8. 13 n.6, 23-24, 26,28,43,46,49, Ophra 44. Tel Keisan 9,25,35-36,51 n. 6.
n. 6,79. Bethel 5,6,44-45,45 n. 5. 50, 52, 65-66, 69, 72, 78. Oxford (UK) 81 n. 9. TelMalhata 8,19, 19n. 16,42.
Williamson, H.G.M. 5-6, 6 n. 3.
Stromberg,Agneta 57 n. 2. Buqe'a (valley) 7. Israel, United kingdom / or general term Tel Masos 8,42,48.
Winter, U. 23, 23 n. 22, 40, 49-50,
Supinska-Lovset, TIona 10, 18,74. Buseirah 31, 39. for both Israel and Judah 16,21- Palestine 13,24. Tel Michal 40,45.
74,76 n. 6.
Suzuki, Y. 6,43. Wiseman, D.l 6,44. 23,27,28 n. 1,30,41,58; 64. Paphos 69. Tel Qasileh 45,62.
Cairo 68. Italy 53. Philakopi 25. Tel Shera 9, 25, 32.
Wittgenstein, L. 23.
Tadmor, H. 4, 5. Wood, B.G. 24,51. Philistia 4, 9, 13, 16, 25, 37, 41, 43-46, Tel Sippor 49.
Tadmor, M. 25,66,78-79. Worschech, U. 6,19,25 n. 25. 62,71,72. Tel Zeror 35.
Talalay, Laurene A 54. 2 Derivative forms are not included, e.g., Jaffa 4,43. Transjordan 4, 15,24,25 n. 25, 30-32, 34,
Wright, G.E. 14,26,40,47, 74, 77. Phoenicia 9, 11, 16,24-25,28, 32-33, 35-
Tatton-Brown, Veronica 20. Israelite, Cypriote, Judean (except the form Jericho 8,43-44,48,52-53,59. 36,41,45-46,49, 53 (coast), 69 36,41,45,72, 77.
Tatum, L. 2, 9, 43. Near Eastern). Neither are names of sites Jerusalem 4-9,13,15-17,17 n. 12, 18-20, (coast), 71-72, 76-77, 79.
Yadin, Y. 7, 7n. 6,9. in references (e.g., Keisan I, Lachish III,
Taylor, J.G. 19. Yellin, 1 7. 22, 22 n. 20, 31-32, 40, 42-43, Punic (world) 28, 32, 35-36. Uppsala (Sweden) 10.
Jerusalem II).

290 291
Ugarit 58. 35:20-24 6. 15:33 76.
UK. 52.
Ur 71. Kings n
U.S.A. 52. Deuteronomy Geneal 5,6.
Uzah (Kh.) 8. General 5. 18-19 4.
7:5 76. 18:13-16 4,5.
Winchester 68. 12:13 76. 18:17-19a 5.
16:1 6. 18:19 76.
Vered Jericho 8,43. 16:21 79. 19:9b-35 5.
19:36-37 5.
Exodus 34: 13 76. 21 5.
3. Index of Biblical Ezekiel 6. 21:7 76,79.
21:19-26 5.
Sources (MT) 23:2-3 5.
Isaiah 5. 23:6 79.
(Chapters and verses in bold letters) 23:4-7 5.
23:15 5,44.
Chronicles n Jeremiah 23:21-23 5.
General 6,9, 17 n. 13, 76, 81. General 6. 23:20-22 6.
2:13 43. 19:1,11 54 n. 1. 23:24-27 6 n. 3.
33:1-9 5. 37:11 6. 23:29 6,44.
33:10-17 5,43. 34:7 6,44. 24:1-2 6,44.
34 43. 44:30 6. 24:10-18 6.
34:2-7 6. 24:17 6.
34:6 6. Kings I
34:33 6. 15:13 79. Micha I 4.

292