Scarabs, Seals, an Amulet and a Pendant

CHAPTER 3

SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMULET AND A PENDANT

BARUCH BRANDL

INTRODUCTION

Forty-eight glyptic finds, an amulet and a pendant were unearthed in eight burial caves excavated between 1978 and 1982 in salvage operations conducted near Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM) on behalf of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums. They were uncovered in the following tombs: Tombs 24,33, 100, 500 and 510 of David Alon's excavation (Permits A-744, A-828, A-857, A-929 and A-l1n), Tombs 1 and 2 of Eliot Braun's excavation (Permit A-1150) and Tomb 803 of Dan Bahat's excavation (Permit A-803) (see Introduction, Chapters 1 and 2).

The finds are discussed below by context, each burial cave separately, following the order in BenArieh's presentation: First those originating in Alon's excavations, then those from Braun's and finally those from Bahat's. In each excavation, the assemblages are presented according to the sequential numbers of the caves. The items are numbered sequentially.

Within each burial cave the finds are presented in chronological order, as no specific contextual data are available regarding the individual items. (As a result the objects could not be dated by the other finds associated with them.)

An attempt has been made to list for each item a large number of excavated parallels from Canaanite and Egyptian/Nubian sites, as a basis for future studies. In the case of early Middle Bronze Age Canaanite scarabs (see below), the term 'parallels' as employed here is more flexible, since stratified material for comparison is still limited in quantity, and thus exact parallels among it are rare. Parallels from collections are cited only when they are essential to the discussion.

A deliberate attempt has been made to standardize the vocabulary and terminology employed in the description of similar elements, features, etc. Regarding issues that have already been discussed in the past by other scholars, I tried to relate to these discussions in order to avoid redundancies.

GENERAL NOTES ON THE SCARABS

In order to avoid repetititions, general notes, which pertain to many scarabs (mainly notes of technical nature), follow here, arranged under the same subheadings used in the descriptions of the individual items.

Material

Glazed Steatite. All the steatite scarabs were glazed.! However, due to the depositional conditions in the tombs, glaze usually survived only partially, mainly in the incisions of the designs on the scarabs' bases and on their sides, and on the flat areas on the beetles' heads.2 In some cases the glaze survived in its entirety and is discernible even inside the perforation.

The original colors of the glaze, which were most probably blue or green, have faded and turned white, yellow or sometimes even reddish.3

Enstatite. Three items are made of enstatite (or heated steatite)4 and their color is usually gray (see below, Heating).

Dimensions

The five main dimensions rendered in this publication, in alphabetical order are: D = diameter, H = height, L = length, T = thickness, W=width.

Method of Manufacture

Heating. This term is used for all enstatite scarabs. It is rendered as an alternative to the term 'glazing', since on those objects no additional materials were added to the carved surfaces before firing.

124 BARUCH BRANDL

Technical Details

Crosshatching. One of the most characteristic features of the 'Hyksos' scarabs is the extensive use of crosshatching on the bodies of the figures depicted.5

'Firing Marks'. Several scarabs have a strip of a different color along the ridge on their backs.6 This may be the result of the glazing process, when the scarabs were placed on their backs during firing in order to achieve the optimal results on the decorated bases.

Scarab/SealShape

There are two main classification systems or typologies of Middle Bronze Age scarab shape details: 7 The first was constructed by Alan Rowe (1936: PIs. 32-35 =

Keel 1995: Ills. 44, 46, 67), and the second by Olga TufnelP (1984:31-38, Figs. 12-14 = Keel 1995: Ills. 45, 49, 69). Neither is accurate enough,9 and there is a noticeable discrepancy between their respective identifications.

I refer to three studies in regard to the Late Bronze Age scarabs and seals: The general classification follows the one provided by Rowe (1936). For the classification of the bifacia1 seals I refer to Keel's classification (1995:84-86, 89-93). Reference is also made to one of the types defined by Hall for the royal scarabs in the British Museum (Hall 1913:xxix-xxxv).

Base Design

Throughout this paper, all the Egyptian hieroglyphic signs are referred to [in square brackets] as they appear in Gardiner's (1973) sign list.

Typology

The Middle Bronze Age design scarabs are described according to Tufnell's Design ClassificationlO with some later modifications made by Keel. ll

Origin

An attempt has been made to determine whether the seals were imported from Egypt or locally made. Recently, Daphna Ben-Tor has convincingly

demonstrated that most of the early Middle Bronze Age design scarabs found in Canaan were local products (her "early Palestinian [scarab] series") and likewise the later Middle Bronze Age ones (her "late Palestinian [scarab] series") (Ben-Tor 1997; 1998b). I fully agree with Ben-Tor's observation, but I wish to offer alternative terms for these two groups, since imitations of Egyptian scarabs were locally produced in Canaan also during the Late Bronze Age, and later. I thus propose to use the terms 'Early Middle Bronze [Age] Canaanite Scarabs' (or EMBCS) for her early series, and 'Late Middle Bronze [Age] Canaanite Scarabs' (or LMBCS) for her late series.

Date

Dating is based on the shape of the scarab or seal, the preciseness of the hieroglyphic signs, the carving style, the royal names, and parallels originating in controlled excavations.

My dating of Ben-Tor's "early Palestinian scarab series" (my EMBCS) differs from her dating, and is lower by 30 years. Most of Ben-Tor's "early Palestinian scarab series" are taken from Ward and Dever's "Period IIA and III" scarabs (Ben-Tor 1997: 167, n. 36; 1998b:153, n. 42). According to these scholars, the scarabs of their Period IIA belong to the later MB I and the transitional MB IIII phase (Albright's MB IIA and transitional MB IIAiMB lIB period)-the Twelfth Dynasty (Ward and Dever 1994:5). The scarabs oftheir Period III belong to early MB II (Albright's early MB IIB)-the early Thirteenth Dynasty (Ward and Dever 1994:5-6).

Following the new synchronisms from Manfred Bietak's excavations at Tell el-Dab'a, Ben-Tor pointed out that both groups existed during the Thirteenth Dynasty. Moreover, despite Ward and Dever's relative chronology (Ward and Dever 1994:5-6) she included Period III scarabs from Megiddo and Jericho in the transitional MB IIA/B period-most probably since these precede her "late Palestinian [scarab] series," generally dated to MB IIB-C (Ben-Tor 1997: 181; 1998b: 159). As a result, and since she follows Bietak's absolute chronology, Ben-Tor dated all her "early Palestinian [scarab] series" between 1710 and 1680 BCE.

I disagree with Ben-Tor's dating on the basis of the following points: (1) The relative chronology of Ward and Dever for 'their' scarabs (transitional MB I/II) is erroneous. According to Beck and Zevulun (1996) all

CHAPTER 3: SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMULET AND A PENDANT 125

these assemblages should be dated to Albright's MB lIB. (2) The Rishon Le-Ziyyon cemetery, which is the basis for Ben-Tor's study, spans, according to its excavator, mid-MB IIA, late MB IIA and early MB IIB (Levy 1993; 1995) and not only late MB IIA-early MB lIB (or the MB IIAIB transition) as cited by Ben-Tor (1997:167; 1998b:153). (3) Some of the hieroglyphic signs which appear on the "early Palestinian scarab series" (my EMBCS), are clearly inspired by midThirteenth-Dynasty royal genealogical scarabs (see for example Scarab 21 from Tomb 510).

Therefore, my dating for the EMBCS is early MB lIB, 1680-1650 BCE according to Bietak's Low Chronology (= Tell el-Dab'a E/3). Accordingly, I date the LMBCS to late MB IIB-MB IIC, or 1650-1530 BCE, with a division between early LMBCS, dating to 1650-1590 BCE (= Tell el-Dab'a E/2 and Ell) and late LMBCS, dating to 1590-1530 BCE (= Tell el-Dab'a D/3 and D/2).

Archaeological Context

Since data regarding the exact find spots of the artifacts within the tombs are nonexistent, the term 'archaeological context' refers to the entire group of items in each tomb, and not the context of any individual scarab.

DESCRIPTION AND DISCUSSION

Tomb 24

1. Scarab (no Reg. No.; IAA 84-1286; Fig. 3.1). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the plates on the beetle's head. Dimensions. L 15 mm, W 10.5 mm, H 6 illill. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Almost complete, the beetle's clypeus is broken.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 67, EP 27, Side 13; Tufnell-B2-I -e9.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, a floral motif is depicted. The plant is composed

of four pairs of double concentric circles, and each pair of circles hangs on a stem bending from the center towards the right or left.12 The lower pair is placed in a drop-shaped vessel,13 and the other three pairs are arranged one above the other.14 Two small nb signs [V 30]15 flank the vessel. 16

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design classes 1E2, "Linear Patterns, Floral Motifs-two stems" (cf. Tufnell1984: Pl. 2: 1059), and 4B2, "Concentric Circles, Linked-double ring" (cf. Tufnell1984: Pl. 21:1935).

Origin. Canaanite. The small nb signs and the Jericho 'parallels' indicate that this scarab belongs to the EMBCS group.

Date. As an EMBCS item, this object should be dated to the beginning of MB IIB, between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

2. Scarab (no Reg. No.; IAA 84-1287; Fig. 3.2). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 15.5 mm, W 10.75 mm, H 7 illill. Method of Mamifacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching and crosshatching. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 1, EP 5, Side 21; TufnellD3-0-elQ.

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, six hieroglyphic signs are arranged symmetrically: The central part of the base is occupied by a nbw, 'gold' [S 12],17 surmounted by a fragmented sm~, 'unite' [F 36], flanked by two antithetical swtplants [M 23].18 The rest of the base is occupied by an 'n!J, 'live' [S 34]19 on each edge.

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design classes 3B5, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Symmetric Patterns-sedge plant (swt)", and 3B6, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Symmetric Patterns-GOLD sign (nbw) in longitudinal setting" (cf. Tufnell 1984: Pl. 14:1628, from Tell el-Far'ah

126 BARUCH BRANDL

[South]; 1640, 1641, 1647, 1655, 1658, from Tell e1-'Ajju1).

In Canaan, other such seal impressions and scarabs were found at Gezer (Macalister 1912 11:330; III: Pi. 209:28), in Cemetery 800 at Tell el-Far'ah (South) (Petrie 1930:9, § 27, Pi. 22:228) and in Tombs 157 and 4004 at Lachish (Rowe 1936: No. 41; Tufnell1958:98, 116, 120, PIs. 32-33:94; 35-36:200).

In Egypt, such scarabs are known from Tell elYahudiyeh (Griffith 1890: Pi. 10:21; Petrie and Garrow Duncan 1906:15, § 18, PIs. 4A [row 7, second from left]; 9:125 = Petrie 1925: Pi. 10:496), Esna (Downes 1974:62 [221, No.8]) and Tell el-Dab'a (Bietak 1968: Pi. 32:d [lower row, second from left] = Mlinar 2001: TD 524).20

Origin. Canaanite. The conjunction of design classes 3B5 and 3B6 is unknown on Egyptian Middle Kingdom scarabs. The few Second Intermediate Period scarabs with these design classes that were found in Egypt (see above) seem to be imports from Canaan. Likewise, due to the appearance of the fragmented sm5 sign, it is clear that this scarab is a local Canaanite product.

Date. At first glance this scarab seems to belong to the EMBCS group, and as such it should be dated to the beginning of MB lIB, between 1680 and 1650 BCE. However, the crosshatched21 fragmented sm5 sign hints at the possibility that the scarab is a little later, and belongs to the earlier group among the LMBCS. If this observation is correct, then the scarab should be dated to the advanced MB lIB, between 1650 and 1590 BCE.

3. Scarab (no Reg. No.; lAA 84-1288; Fig. 3.3). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the beetle's head. Dimensions. L 10.5 mm, W 7.5 mm, H 5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete.


Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, three hieroglyphic signs are depicted: The entire lower half is occupied by a wd3t-eye, 'the uninjured eye of Horus' [D 10],22 while the upper half is occupied by an i'rt, uraeus (or cobra) [I 12] on the left, and a sn sign [V 7] on the right.

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design class 3A3, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Varia" (cf. Tufnell 1984: PIs. 8:1331; 8b:1386). According to Keel's modifications it should be included in his new design class: 9C6, einzelner Uraus (Keel 1995: 161, 192, § 529).

Origin. Canaanite. Although the uraeus and the sn sign appear in the same mode on Egyptian scarabs and seal impressions from the Middle Kingdom,23 the combination of the uraeus on top of the wd3t-eye is known only in Canaan.24

Date. The scarab seems to be early within the LMBCS group, to be dated between 1650 and 1590 BCE. This suggestion is based on the archaeological context of its closest parallels-Gezer, Cave 28 II and Jericho Tomb J 9 [Group IV]. A parallel scarab of a later date, which should be related to the second part of the LMBCS group, between 1590 and 1530 BCE, was uncovered at Tell el-' Ajjul (Petrie 1934: Pi. 11 :431 = Keel 1997:438--439, No. 986).

Archaeological Context of the Tomb 24 Items The dates of the scarabs from this tomb fit those of the other objects found in it, which were assigned to MB lIB, possibly starting somewhat earlier (see Chapter 2).

Tomb 33

4. Scarab (no Reg. No.; IAA 84-1290; Fig. 3.4). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the beetle's head. Dimensions. L 12 mm, W 8 mm, H 4.75 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship: Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation: Complete.


Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 3, EP 5, Side 2; TufnellD6/D3-0-e6b.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, nine hieroglyphic signs are placed below and above a horizontal divider composed of a twist or a central cable.25

The lower part is occupied by a pair of confronted ljrw birds, 'the falcon-god Horus' [G 5],26 which stand on the same nb-shaped boat [G 7*].27 Behind each bird is a degenerated version of what seems to be the sign sm5, 'unite' [F 36] or perhaps nfr 'good' [F 35].28 The center of the upper part is occupied by three hieroglyphs that create the word Ptah, the name of the god of Memphis, addorsed by the sign /:zm, 'majesty' [U 36]29 or S5, 'protection' [V 18].30

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design class 6C3, "Encompassed-central cable" (cf. Tufnell 1984: PI. 27:2218). It also belongs to Keel's new design classes 9H2, Paarweise angeordnete Falken

(Keel 1995:162, 203, § 557) and lIC, Namen von Gottheiten (Keel 1995:162, 241-242, § 641).31

Origin. Canaanite. According to Keel the scarab belongs to a well-defined group of scarabs on which the name of the god Ptah was incorporated among other hieroglyphic signs. Most of those scarabs were found in Canaanite sites (Tell el-Far'ah [South], Jericho, Lachish, Bet Zur, Aphek, Gezer and 'Afula)32 and the earlier scarabs among these were dated by him to MB lIB or the Thirteenth Dynasty (Keel 1995:241-242, § 641). A common phenomenon on many of these scarabs is the inverted t sign, which looks like a nb

sign, and also hints at a non-Egyptian origin.33

Date. The scarab seems to belong to the EMBCS group on the basis of parallels at Jericho: the abovementioned scarab from Tomb B 48 [Group II] for the confronted falcons,34 and another, from Tomb P 1 (Group II: Kirkbride 1965: Fig. 287: 10 = Tufnell1984: PI. 31 :2326) for the name Ptah. As such the scarab should be dated to the beginning of MB lIB, between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

5. Scarab (no Reg. No.; IAA 84-2168; Fig. 3.5). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 10.5 mm, W 7 mm, H 4.5 mm.

Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Mediocre. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 24, EP 5, Side 40(?); Tufuell-B2( x )-0-e5.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, three geometric signs are arranged in a column. The uppermost one looks like a t sign [X 1], the central sign resembles the Latin letter M, and the lowest looks like a nb sign [V 30]. However, since the horizontal lines ofthe upper and lower signs continue so as to join the frame and the central sign is carved in a diagonal plane, it seems that the signs are not Egyptian at all. 35

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design class IB, "Linear Patterns, Geometric" (cf. Tufnell1984: PI. 1:1006, from Ruweise).

Origin. Canaanite. It seems that this scarab follows earlier local products such as Ruweise Tomb 66, Scarab No.1 (Tufuell 1975-1976:6,9, 18, Fig. 1:1 =

Tufnell1984: PI. 1:1006 = Ward and Dever 1994:100, Fig. 5: 1 b.39). 36

Date. Although the scarab is similar to scarab No. from Tomb 66 at Ruweise in several ways (dimensions, shape and general appearance of the decorated base) it seems to me that the TBM scarab is later and belongs to the early range of the LMBCS group. In my view, it should be associated with similar scarabs that bear two nb signs, such as those from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1934: PI. 7:191, 234 = Keel 1997:360-361, No. 751; 374-375, No. 794) and Lachish (Tufuell 1958: PI. 32:89). The degenerated signs may be compared with those on two additional scarabs from Tell el'Ajjul (Petrie 1933: PI. 3:68; Petrie et aI. 1952: PI. 10:89 = Keel 1997:250-251, No. 436; 484-485, No. 1115). As such the scarab should be dated between 1650 and 1590 BCE.

6. Scarab (no Reg. No.; IAA 84-1289; Fig. 3.6). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 15 mm, W 10.5 mm, H 6.5 mm.

128 BARUCH BRANDL

Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides, linear engraving. On the back is a typical 'firing mark'. Preservation. Complete, with few scars.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 22, EP 5, Side 13; Tufuell-B2(+)-0-e9.

Base Design. Within a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, these is a scroll border, in the center of which are two hieroglyphic signs one above the other.

The lower hieroglyph is dd, 'be stable' or 'enduring' [R 11]37 and above it is the bread-shaped t sign [X 1].38 The top loop is filled with parallel strokes.39 A special phenomenon on this scarab is the perfect adjustment of the hieroglyphic signs to the scroll border: the top of the sign dd and the base of the sign t appear as connecting to the upper pair of scrolls.40

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufuell's design class 7B2 (ii)a, "Scroll Borders, Paired scrolls, top loop-two pairs, oblong, hooked" (cf. Tufuell 1984: PI. 30-where the Jericho scarabs are related to Groups III-V).

Origin: Canaanite. Typical 'Hyksos'.

Date. The scarab is clearly identified as 'Hyksos' or LMBCS on the basis of all the parallels mentioned above. As such it should be dated between 1650 and 1530 BCE.41

7. Scarab (no Reg. No.; IAA 84-1283; Fig. 3.7). Material. Composition. Light blue or azure. Dimensions. L 16 mm, W 9.5 mm, H 7.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Molding, perforating, incising and firing. Workmanship. Mediocre. Technical Details. Perforated, the perforation was made by pulling a straw or a metal barb. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 58, EP 5, Side 60; Tufnell-(?)-0-e7 (?).

Base Design. Plain.

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design class 12B, "Uninscribed Scarabs" (cf. Tufnell 1984:40-41, Figs. 15:24,30; 148).

Origin: Canaanite?

Date. According to Rowe the time span of HC 58 is 'Hyksos' to Eighteenth Dynasty, and that of Side 60 is 'Hyksos' (Rowe 1936:299, 307, PIs. 32:58; 35:60 =

Keel 1995:42, Ills. 44:58, 53; 67:60 respectively). Therefore the scarab belongs to the LMBCS group, and as such should be dated between 1650 and 1530 BCE.

8. Scarab (no Reg. No.; IAA 84-1285; Fig. 3.8). Material. Serpentine? Dimensions. L 19.5 mm, W 14 mm, H 9 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling and incising. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 62, EP 1, Side 19; Tufnell-B3-0-e 11.

Base Design. Plain.

Typology. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design class 12B, "Uninscribed Scarabs" (see Tufnell1984:148).

Origin. Canaanite. The raw material was imported from Syria.

Date. According to Rowe, HC 62 dates to the Hyksos period, and Side 19-from c. the Thirteenth Dynasty to the Hyksos period (Rowe 1936:299, 305, PIs. 32:62; 35:19 = Keel 1995:42, Ills. 44:62, 53; 67:19 respectively). Therefore the scarab belongs to the LMBCS, and as such should be dated between 1650 and 1530 BCE.

9. Hemispherical Seal (no Reg. No.; IAA 84-1291; Fig. 3.9). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. D 8 mm, H 5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing.


Workmanship. Mediocre. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Complete.

Seal Shape. Several terminologies have been employed in the literature for the shape of such seals. According to Rowe the seal belongs to the general group of hemispherical seals (Rowe 1936: Nos. S.8 [A],42 S.10, S.16, S.17, S.27, S.28). Tufnell employed the traditional term-"Button Seal with a Rosette back" (Tufnell 1958: 123, No. 320, PI. 38:320). Keel's terminology is "Round piece with domed back" and he divides these seals into five types (Keel 1995:81, § 196). Our seal would belong to his Type II: "Round piece with domed back, with grooved or double grooved side" (Keel 1995:82, § 198).

The back of the TBM seal is divided into eight, and one of the four main bisecting grooves does not cross through the center. Two vertical short scores were incised on the opposite sides to mark the drilling points.

Base Design. Four overlapping pairs of concentric circles. Such circles are known on 'Hyksos' scarabs and seals from Canaan, Egypt and Nubia.43

Typology. The seal belongs to Tufnell's design class 4E2, "Concentric Circles, Varia-double ring" (cf. Tufnelll984: PI. 22:1996,1997).

Origin. Canaanite. This is a new form of seal, invented in Canaan.

Date. The TBM hemispherical seal can be dated both on the basis of its shape and by its base design. The closest parallel for the seal's shape was uncovered in Tomb 1145B at Megiddo (Guy 1938: PI. 152:1), which the excavator dated to LB I. Rowe dated that seal to the Thirteenth-Fourteenth Dynasties (Rowe 1936: No. S. 8 [AD, but he designated the other three scarabs from the same tomb as 'Hyksos' (Rowe 1936: Nos. 256, 413 and 166). On the basis of these finds and the decorated bone inlay from the same tomb (Guy 1938: PI. 152:14), the Megiddo seal should be defined as late Hyksos.44

As shown above, the base design, of overlapping concentric circles, appears on late Hyksos scarabs and seals.

Therefore, the seal should be related to the later part of the LMBCS group, and dated between 1590 and 1530 BCE.

Archaeological Context of the Tomb 33 Items The dates of the scarabs and seal from Tomb 33 fit those of the other objects found in the cave, dated to MB lIB (see Chapter 2).

Tomb 100

10. Bifacial Oval Plaque (Reg. No. 461; IAA 84-1276; Fig. 3.10). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 18.5 mm, W 13.75 mm, T 4 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Mediocre. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled diagonally from both sides. Linear and hollowed-out engraving. Preservation. Complete, except for a scar on the left side of 'Face A'. Few traces of the original green color.

Seal Shape. Bifacial oval plaque.45 The seal belongs to Keel's Type II, "oval, double sided inscribed piece with smooth sides" (Keel 1995:84, § 204).

Base Design. The seal has two decorated faces; 'Face A' is the main one. 'Face A': In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, is a central motif accompanied by hieroglyphic 'inscriptions'. The central motif, which occupies the entire height of the space, is a royal sphinx passant. It has a lion's body, its human royal head has a false beard and an uraeus is emerging from the forehead. In front of the sphynx, in a vertical oval, is the prenomen of Amenhotep II (':;-bprw-RC). Above his back is the title or epithet nJr nfr, 'good god',46 and behind him the sign /:lq:;, 'rule' or 'ruler' [S 38].47 Taken together, the reading should be 'Good god, the ruler Amenhotep II' .48

'Face B': In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, there is a motif composed of two pairs of combined cobras interlocked with a cross design.49

Typology. The plaque belongs to the general group of seals and scarabs that bear' Royal Names'. 50 Each face

130 BARUCH BRANDL

may be assigned to a more restricted group: 'Face A' clusters with a small group of bifacial oval plaques, produced for six or seven decades, during the days of Thutmose III, Amenhotep II, Thutrnose IV and Amenhotep IllY It is the first provenanced Amenhotep sealY

'Face B' could be considered a design scarab. This motif originated most probably from Tufnell's design class 6BI, "Coiled and 'Woven' Patterns, Convoluted-coils" (cf. Tufnell 1984: PI. 24:2070, 2073,2075), which appears on LMBCS.53

Origin. Canaanite? Its mediocre workmanship may point to the possibility that the seal is a local product, which imitated an Egyptian prototype. Alternatively, it may be a product of an apprentice or a beginner in an Egyptian workshop.

Date. On the basis of the royal name-Amenhotep II-the seal dates to the last third of the fifteenth century BCE.

11. Cylinder Seal (Reg. No. 447; IAA 84-1293; Fig. 3.11). Material. Faience or sintered quartz.54 Light blue or azure glaze. Dimensions. H 24 mm, D 9.5-10 mm, circumference 26.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Hand forming,55 perforating, drilling, impressing, incising and firing. Workmanship. Mediocre. Technical Details. Perforated, by pulling a straw or a metal barb. Linear engraving. Preservation. Complete, loosing its glaze.

Seal Shape. Cylinder seal. It is a typical product of mass-production techniques.

Seal Design. The design is composed of a main scene and of a terminal (or subsidiary) scene in a single register, with borderlines on top and bottom. The main scene comprises three male figures. They are rendered in frontal view, the heads are rendered in profile, and they are very schematic and linear. 56

Each figure has a helmet-like headdress57 and a beard. Their shoulders are wide, the torso, the arms and the legs are stick like; the lower part of the body is represented by a circle, while the palms and the feet are not shown at all. 58 The first figure has both arms

folded and touching the chest, while the second and third figures place one of their arms on the shoulder of the figure ahead of them.

The terminal consists of a linear feather-like tree between two parallellines,59 or a feather-shaped panel.60

The TBM cylinder seal belongs to a small group in the Mitannian 'Common Style'. The parallels cited below were clustered into groups according to the degree of their similarity to our seal: full parallels, parallels without the terminal, parallels with a different terminal, and 'relative parallels'.

Only one full parallel is known, from Cave A2 in the Baq'ah Valley Project (Brown 1986: No.2, Fig. 94:3). A close variant, with two figures only and with some differences in the terminal, was found in the same burial cave (Brown 1986: No.3, Fig. 94:4).

Parallels without the terminal are known from three sites: Tel Ta'anach(Sellin 1904:27, Fig. 41a= Nougayrol 1939:15-16 [TT 3], PI. 12, No. 32); Tomb 1145B at Megiddo, where a fourth figure replaces the terminal (Guy 1938:182-183, Fig. 181:1, PI. 152:5 = Parker 1949: No. 32 = Mazar 1978:11, No. 26); and Stratum VII at Bet She'an, with six figures (Parker 1949: No. 74 = Dabney 1993:229, 231 [Seal 7], PI. 58g).61

Only one parallel with a different terminal is known, from Stratum VII at Bet She'an, where the leading figure is looking backwards (Rowe 1940: PI. 40: 18 = Parker 1949: No. 66 = Dabney 1993:229, 231 [No.6], PI. 58f).62

In the seals considered relative parallels, the hands of the figures are stretched downward. The closest such 'parallel', where the figures' bodies are also sticklike, was found in Stratum VIII at Bet She' an (Rowe 1940: PI. 40:11 = Dabney 1993:229, 233 [No. 25], PI. 60e),63 while on seals from Alalakh (Collon 1982: No. 78) and Ugarit (Schaeffer-Forrer et al. 1983:91 [R.S. 7.106]; 100-101 [R.S. 9.130]) it seems that the second and third figures place one arm on the shoulder of the figure in front of them. 64

A variant, where the figures' bodies are rendered by small diagonal strokes, is known from two examples: a cylinder seal with nine figures from Stratum VIII at Bet She'an (Rowe 1940: PI. 37:10 = Parker 1949: No. 93 = Mazar 1978:10-11, No. 25 = Dabney 1993:229, 233 [No. 26], PI. 60f); and from Stratum 16 at Shiqmona (Elgavish 1977a:265, PI. 9:a; 1977b:167, PI. 22:D; 1994:37,40, I1l. 13).65

Many of these cylinder seals were interpreted as generally representing dancers66 or specifically


participants in a sacred dance,67 while the figures on the Nuzi seal impressions were identified as participants in a battle dance.68 It seems that dancers are indeed the common motif on all the cylinder seals mentioned above.69

Typology. This seal belongs to the Mitannian 'Common Style' (Porada 1947:11-13)10 and, alongside all its parallels, is also related to a Syro-Palestinian subgroup of the Mitannian 'Common Style'.71

Origin. Imported from Mitanni, possibly specifically from Nuzi.72

Date. On the basis of its parallels-from Cave A2 in the Baq' ah Valley,73 from Tomb 1145B at Megiddo and from U garit-the seal is to be dated to the fifteenth century BCE.74

12. Bifacial Rectangular Plaque (Reg. No. 605; IAA 84-1271; Fig. 3.12). Material. Faience. Light blue glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 12 mm, W 9.5 mm, T 5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Molding, perforating, incising and firing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated diagonally, most probably with a metal barb. Linear, hollowed-out engraving. Preservation. Complete.

Seal Shape. Bifacial rectangular plaque.75 It belongs to Keel's Type II, "Rectangular, double sided inscribed typical Egyptian piece, with smooth sides" (Keel 1995:90-91, §§ 220-221).

Base Design. Both faces bear the same design. In a vertical rectangle, which serves as a frame, the prenomen of Amenhotep III (Nb-m?'t-W) is situated.76

Typology. The plaque belongs to the general group of seals and scarabs that bear 'Royal Names'.77

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan.

Date. On the basis of the royal name-Amenhotep III-the seal dates to the first half of the fourteenth century BCE.

13. Scaraboid (Reg. No. 460; IAA 84-1294; Fig. 3.13). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 17 mm, W 12.5 mm, H 7 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear, hollowed-out engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete. Few traces of the original green color have survived.

Seal Shape. Hall's (1913) Type K1.78

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, a 'pastoral' scene is depicted. The main motif is a crouching antelope looking frontward, with a branch behind it. A curving line in front of the animal seems to represent an additional branch.

Typology. Design scaraboid. The motif of an antelope and a branch is already attested during the Middle Bronze Age as Tufnell's design class 9B, "Animals and Heraldic Beasts-Antelopes" (cf. Tufnell 1984: 132, Pl. 36:2487, 2489, 2501, 25lO). This caused some scholars to confuse the early and later appearances of the motip9 However, there is a clear distinction between the Second Intermediate Period and the New Kingdom appearances of that motif: on Second Intermediate Period seals the antelope's front legs are stretched forward,80 while during the New Kingdom they are bent in front of the body.81

This motif was very popular during the Eighteenth Dynasty, and it appears also on other types of seals, such as cylinder seals,82 bifacial oval plaques83 and Hall's Type K1 scaraboids. 84

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan. Hall's Type K1 seals seem to be a new innovation in Egypt itself.85

Date. The scaraboid can be dated to the latter part of the Eighteenth Dynasty on the basis of two factors-its shape and its design. Regarding shape: Hall has published eight such seals, which are kept in the British Museum (1913: Nos. 1677, 1791, 1828, 1835, 1850, 1943, 1957 and 1963). The first bears the prenomen of Amenhotep II, four have the prenomen of Amenhotep III, one is related to this latter ruler and the last two bear the prenomen of Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten.

132 BARUCH BRANDL

Regarding design: As mentioned above, a cylinder seal and a bifacial oval plaque with the same motif are inscribed with the prenomen of Amenhotep II.

It thus seems that we may narrow the date of this seal (Hall's Type Kl) to the same chronological range as that of the Type Kl seal previously found at TBM, bearing the prenomen of Amenhotep III, i.e., the fIrst half of the fourteenth century BCE.

14. Bifacial Rectangular Plaque (Reg. No. 604; IAA 84-1274; Fig. 3.14). Material. Composition. White, with hieroglyphic signs in black. Dimensions. L 15.5 mm, W 11 mm, T 5.25 mm. Method of Manufacture. Molding, perforating, incising and fIring. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, by pulling a straw or a metal barb. Linear, hollowed-out engraving. Preservation. Complete, but all its surfaces are deteriorating.

Seal Shape. Bifacial rectangular plaque.86 The seal belongs to Keel's Type II, "rectangular, double sided inscribed typical Egyptian piece, with smooth sides" (Keel 1995:90--91, §§ 220--221).

Base Design. Both faces bear the same design. In a horizontal rectangle, which serves as a frame, the sign njr, 'good' [F 35]87 and the royal title s~ W, 'the son of [the god] Ra' ,88 are placed.

Typology. The plaque belongs to a small group of seals and scarabs that bear the title 'Good [is the] son of [the god] Ra'.89

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan.90

Date. Based on the date of the context of the Tell el'Ajjul parallel (see n. 89; the fourteenth century BCE), it is suggested here that the TBM seal be dated to the same time span.

Archaeological Context of the Tomb 100 Items The pottery of Tomb 100 was dated to LB II, the fourteenth-thirteenth centuries BCE (see Chapter 2). The dates of the glyptic fmds fIt only the earlier part of this range; the thirteenth century is not represented by the seals.

Tomb 500

15. Scarab (Reg. No.8; IAA 81-2006; Fig. 3.15). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the beetle's head and sides. Dimensions. L 13 (estimated 16.25) mm, W 11.25 mm, H6mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching. Preservation. Broken; the front is missing.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 1124, EP 42, Side 13; Tufnell-B2 (?)-I-e9.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, a stylized and symmetric cross-shaped floral motif is depicted.91 The arms of the cross are composed of four lotus flowers92 that emerge from a double-ringed concentric motif. The lateral lotus flowers are flanked by leaves. The vertical lotus flowers are flanked by double-ringed concentric motifs, which are linked by an arched line.93

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design classes 4B2, "Concentric Circles, Linked-double ring", and 5, "Cross Patterns" (cf. Tufnelll984: PIs. 21; 23:2045).

Origin. Canaanite. A forerunner of this scarab was found in the Harbor Cemetery at Tel Aviv (Leibovitch 1955: Fig. 6:20 = Ward and Dever 1994: Fig. 5:1a:21).

Date. The TBM scarab seems to be slightly later than that from Tel Aviv. The closest 'parallel', with a double-ringed concentric motif in the center of the cross pattern, is a scarab from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1934: PI. 5:73 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 23:2045 = Keel 1997:318-319, No. 633), which defmitely belongs to the later series. Therefore the scarab seems to belong to the earlier part of the LMBCS group, and as such it should be dated between 1650 and 1590 BCE.

16. Scarab in Metal Mounting (Reg. No.7; IAA 81-2005; Fig. 3.16). Materials. Scarab--enstatite, gray. Mounting-gold.


Dimensions. Including mounting, L 11.75 mm, W8.5 mm,H 5mm. Method of Manufacture. Scarab-carving, abrading, drilling, incising and heating. Mounting-casting, flattening, soldering and perforation. Workmanship. Mediocre. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. The mounting seems to have been originally manufactured for a larger scarab, but the holes in it fit the scarab's perforation. Preservation. Complete. A scar was made during the modeling of the mounting. The ring did not survive.

Scarab Shape. Unknown; obscured by the mounting.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, there are a dozen horizontal parallel lines, one above the other. These are bisected by two vertical lines, which create a central 'column'.

Very similar scarabs, but where the horizontal lines reach the 'column' and do not cross it, were unearthed in Canaan and Egypt. The Canaanite examples originate from Tell el-Far'ah (South) (Petrie 1930: PI. 7:994 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 1:1009 = Schroer 1989:106, Ill. 018; 108) and Jericho (Rowe 1936: No. 623 =

Schroer 1989: 106, Ills. 024, 108). The Egyptian ones are from Tell el-Yahudiyeh (Petrie and Garrow Duncan 1906: PI. 9:187 = Petrie 1925: PI. 8:231 = Schroer 1989: 1 06, Ill. 029; 108).

This motif has two variants: The first variant,· which has only the horizontal parallel lines, is known on a scarab found at Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1934: PI. 9:390 =

Tufnell 1984: PI. 1:1015 = Keel 1997:424-425, No. 946). In the second variant, the parallel lines on one side are slightly diagonal. This variant is known on two scarabs, one from Tell el-Far'ah (North) (Dumortier 1996:58-59 [No. 26], PI. 4:26 = Schroer 1989:106, Ill. 017; 107, 108) and the other from a Middle Bronze Age tomb at the citadel of 'Amman (Najjar 1991 :109-110, Fig. 5:3; 133, PI. 3:1 [second on the left]).

All these were considered by Silvia Schroer (and by Keel, as may be deduced from his typology) as variants of the more common bush or stylized tree motif.95

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design class IB, "Linear Patterns, Geometric" (cf. Tufuell 1984: PI. 1:1009). According to Keel's modification the design class of our scarab should be IF, Zweig (Keel 1995:159, 164, § 433).

Origin. Canaanite. All the parallels, including that from Tell el-Yahudiyeh, are typical 'Hyksos' products.

Date. On the basis of all its parallels, the scarab should be related to the LMBCS group and as such should be dated between 1650 and 1530 BCE.

Archaeological Context of the Tomb 500 Items Tomb 500 produced MB lIB, LB II and Iron II finds. The dates of the glyptics fit only the earliest (MB II) period of burial. It is however possible that five Late Bronze Age and Iron II glyptic objects that were attributed to MB II Tomb 510 (Nos. 33-37) belong to this tomb (for a possible mixture between those two tombs, see below, Tomb 510 and Chapter 2).

Tomb 510

17. Scarab (Reg. No. 26; IAA 81-2011; Fig. 3.17). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the beetle's head. Dimensions. L 16.5 mm. W 12 mm, H 7.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good to excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 3, EP 5, Side 2; TufuellD6-0-e6b.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, there is a motif composed of two rounded interlocking spirals that are linked to each other by two elaborate scrolls-like elements.

Typology. Design scarab. It resembles two of Tufuell's design classes: 2B2, "Scrolls and Spirals, Round interlocking spirals, unending" (cf. Tufuell 1984: PI. 6: 1222, 1266, 1273), and 7 A(ii)a, "Scroll Borders, Continuous--'oblong, hooked" (cf. Tufnell 1984: PI. 39:2268, 2269, 2279). Likewise, it resembles some Egyptian scarabs of design class 2B 1, "Scrolls and Spirals, Round interlocking spirals, with ends" from Kahun, U ronarti and Harageh (Tufnelll97 5: Fig. 3: 129, 154; Engelbach 1923: PI. 20:34, 51).

Origin. Egyptian96 or Canaanite.

134 BARUCH BRANDL

Date. If the scarab is indeed an Egyptian product of the Thirteenth Dynasty, then it could be dated between 1770 and 1650 BCE, and belong either to the end of MB IIA97 or to the beginning of MB 1m. As such, it would be the earliest scarab found in the TBM tombs. If, however, the scarab is a local Canaanite product, then it belongs to the EMBCS group and .should be dated to the beginning of MB IIB, between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

18. Scarab (no Reg. No.; IAA 84-2138; Fig. 3.18). Material. Carnelian. Dimensions. L 16 mm, W 11 mm, H 7 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling and incising. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Preservation. Almost complete, with a break on the frontal part of its base.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 38, EP 1, Side 44; Tufnell-D8-0-0.

Base Design. Plain.

Typology. The scarab belongs to Tufuell's design class 12B, "Uninscribed Scarabs" (Tufuell 1984:40-41, Fig. 15:19-21; 148).

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan.98

Date. The scarab should be related to the EMBCS group, due to its resemblance to a scarab from Tomb D 9 at Jericho of Group II early (Kirkbride 1965: Fig. 284:4 = Tufuell 1984: Fig. 15:21). As such it should be dated between 1680 and 1650 BCE, or earlier.

19. Scarab (Reg. No. 36; IAA 81-2010; Fig. 3.19). Material. Glazed steatite. Yellowish glaze, nearcomplete coverage. Dimensions. L 15.5 mm, W 10.5 mm, H 6 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 24, EP 5, Side 13; Tufuell-B2-0-e9.

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, there are eight signs. In the center is a B/:tdt(y) , 'The Bel).detite'99 (an epithet of the winged solar HoruS).100 A pair of double-ringed concentric motifs is set above the winged solar disc and a second pair below it. These designs are flanked by two dsrt signs, 'The Red Crown of Lower Egypt' [S 3pO\ one facing right and the other facing left, with a diagonal r sign [D 21] 102 on the left.

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufuell's design classes 3B3b, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Symmetric Patterns-Red Crowns addorsed", and 4E2, "Concentric Circles, Varia-double ring" (Tufuell 1984: PIs. 12:1555, 1559, 1561, 1564, 1565, 1567; 22:1995).

Origin. Canaanite. This identification is supported by the clumsy shapes of the Red Crowns and the additional r sign on the left. It may also be deduced from the winged solar disc, which is not found among Egyptian Middle Kingdom scarabs.103 Moreover, such clumsy winged solar discs are not found among the 'Hyksos' scarabs. 104 Therefore our scarab seems to belong to the EMBCS group.

Date. The scarab belongs to the EMBCS group, and as such should be dated between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

20. Scarab (Reg. No. 28; IAA 81-2013; Fig. 3.20). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 16.75 (estimated 18) mm, W 6.75 (estimated 12) mm, H 8.25 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching. Preservation. Broken. Less than half survived, but due to its fully symmetric design it was possible to reconstruct its base completely.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 1, EP 5, Side 13; TufuellD3-0-e9.


Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, three motifs are depicted: In the center is a stylized and symmetric cross-shaped floral motif, composed of two pairs oflotus flowers, 105 with a small and disconnected circle as their center. The vertical lotus flowers are thicker and were decorated by hatching, while the horizontal ones are thinner and plain. The vertical lotus flowers are flanked by leaves, from the ends of which double-ringed concentric motifs are hanging.

The upper and lower exergues are occupied by a clump of three papyrus plants [M 15 and 16], which grows on a strip of land (the symbol of Lower Egypt);106 the lower motif is rendered upside down.

The closest parallel is a scarab from Tell e1-' Ajju1, which, however, has only the central motif (Petrie 1934: PI. 5:73 = Tufnell1984: PIs. 21:1947; 23:2045 = Keel 1997:318-319, No. 633107).108 Two such clumps of three papyrus plants appear on a scarab from the Tel Aviv Harbor Cemetery (Leibovitch 1955: Fig. 6:6 =

Ward and Dever 1994:99, Fig. 5:1a:12).

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design classes 1E3, "Linear Patterns, Floral Motifs-three stems"; 4B2, "Concentric Circles, Linked-double ring"; and 5, "Cross Patterns" (cf. Tufnell1984: PIs. 3: 1074-1075; 21:1947; 23:2045).

Origin. Canaanite. A forerunner (also to Scarab 15 [Tomb 500; Fig. 3.15]) was found in the Harbor Cemetery at Tel Aviv (Leibovitch 1955: Fig. 6:20 =

Ward and Dever 1994:99, Fig. 5:1a:21).

Date. On the basis of the Harbor Cemetery parallels to the motifs (above), the scarab belongs to the EMBCS group, and as such should be dated between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

21. Scarab (Reg. No. 37; IAA 81-2007; Fig. 3.21). Material. Glazed steatite. Yellowish glaze, almost complete coverage. Dimensions. L 13.25 mm, W 9 mm, H 5.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 24, EP 5, Side 13; Tufnell-B2-0-e9.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, six signs are set in three columns, some of them very clumsy: at the top of the central colunm is the word iri, 'make' [D 4],109 below it is a r' sign [N 5],110 in the center a rifr sign, 'good' [F 35]111 and at the bottom a nb sign, 'lord' or 'every' [V 30].112 On each side of the central column is a m:;'t or swt, 'truth' or 'feather' [H 6].113

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design class 3A3, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Varia" (Tufnell1984: PIs. 8:1324; 8b:1392).

Origin. Canaanite. The clumsy m:;'t or swt sign appears on many scarabs of the EMBCS group: Megiddo (Loud 1948: PIs. 149:14-16, 28; 150:96 = Tufnell 1973: respectively Nos. 20, 3, 7, 29, 72); the Tel Aviv Harbor Cemetery (Leibovitch 1955: Fig. 6:1, 5); Shechem (Wright 1957: Fig. 3 = Hom 1962: No. 26); Hazor (Yadin et ai. 1958: PI. 118:27,31 = Tufnell 1984:57, Fig. 17); Gibeon (Pritchard 1963: Fig. 70:21); Mo~a (Sussman 1966:40-41, PI. 10:5) and Rishon LeZiyyon (Ben-Tor 1997: Figs. 3:5, 8:1). Moreover, the combination of a nfr addorsed by the m:;'t or swt sign appears on a scarab from Lachish (Tufnell 1958: PI. 30:48).


22. Scarab (Reg. No. 23; IAA 81-2003; Fig. 3.22). Material. Glazed steatite. Yellowish glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 14.75 mm, W 9.75 mm, H 6.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 24, EP 5, Side 13; Tufnell-B2-0-e9.

Base Design. In a vertical, oval rope border six signs are placed in a meaningless combination, in three tiers.

136 BARUCH BRANDL

In the upper tier is a sign that has been interpreted in various ways114 but to me seems to be one of the earliest depictions of the solar barque. liS

In the second tier are four signs: On the left side is an i'rt, uraeus (or cobra) [I 12], to its right is a ntr, 'god' [R 8],116 while on the right is an 'nlj, 'live' [S 34]117 above a miniature nb, 'lord' or 'all' [V 30]y8 In the lower tier is an additional nb sign.

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design classes 3A3, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Varia"; 3A4, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Monograms and Varia-Horus hawk with ntr and other signs"; and 8A, "Rope Borders, Twisted Strand" (Tufnell1984: PIs. 8:1323; 9:1447,1461; 34).

Origin. Canaanite. The most characteristic sign is the solar barque, which is characteristic of many EMBCS.119


23. Scarab (Reg. No. 25; IAA 81-2001; Fig. 3.23). Material. Glazed steatite. Yellowish glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 20 mm, W 13.5 mm, H 8.75 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching. Preservation. Almost complete. There is a scar on the back side.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 1, EP 5, Side 13; TufnellD3-0-e9.

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, ten signs are placed: In the middle is a palm-tree branch,120 which divides the scarab into two diagonal parts.12l To its right three signs huddle: on the extreme right is a clumsy dsrt or 'The Red Crown of Lower Egypt' [S 3],122 to its left is the sign J;m, 'majesty' [U 36]123 or perhaps the sign s~, 'protection' [V 18]124 and above it a diagonal nb, 'lord' or 'all' sign [V 30].125

To the left of the branch are six signs. At the top is the determinative of a pyramid surrounded by a wall

[024], below it, parallel to the branch, is a long bar,126 and to its left-a column of four signs: a wrj, 'stele' [026], another 'Red Crown' lying on its backside,127 a clumsy', 'ann' [D 36]128 and a clumsy n sign [N 35].129

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design class 3C, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Formulae", the so-called "an-ra style inscriptions" (Tufnell1984:121, PI. 16).'30

Origin. Canaanite. The bar and the clumsy shape of several of the signs, such as the 'Red Crown', 131 and the ' and the n signs,132 all indicate that the scarab belongs to the EMBCS group.


24. Scarab (Reg. No. 38; IAA 81-2012; Fig. 3.24). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the beetle's head (not indicated in drawing). Dimensions. L 16 mm, W 12 mm, H 8 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 48(?), EP 5, Side 2; Tufnell-B4(?)1B8(?)-0-e6b.

Base Design. In a vertical oval rope border, four signs are placed in a meaningless combination, all in one column, which is surrounded by an additional inner border composed of continuous round and hooked scrolls.

At the top is the sign " 'ann' [D 36],133 below it are the m, 'owl' [G 17]134 and the swt [M 23].135 The lowest sign is s~,'son' [G 39].'36

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design classes 2B2, "Scrolls and Spirals, Round interlocking spirals, unending"; 7A1a, "Scroll Borders, Continuous-round, hooked"; and 8A, "Rope Borders, Twisted Strand" (cf. Tufnell1984: PIs. 6: 1268; 28; 34).


Origin. Canaanite. The scarab seems to belong to the earlier group of local scarabs (EMBCS). The pseudoinscription recalls two scarabs from Jericho. 137 Such an ' sign also appears on a scarab from the Harbor Cemetery in Tel Aviv. 138


25. Scarab (Reg. No. 31; IAA 81-2017; Fig. 3.25). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the beetle's head. Dimensions. L 16.75 mm, W 11.25 mm, H 7.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 58, EP 5, Side 2; TufnellA4-0-e6b.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, six hieroglyphic signs are arranged in four tiers, surrounded by a scroll border.

At the top is an inverted nb sign [V 30]139 or perhaps a clumsy Or sign, 'hill of the sunrise' [N 28]140 above a bit, 'bee' [L 2].141 Below are two pairs: two nfr signs, 'good' [F 35]142 above two 'no signs, 'live' [S 34].143

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design classes 3A3, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Varia", and 7B3(ii)a, "Scroll Borders, Paired scrolls, top loop-three pairs, oblong, hooked" (Tufuell 1984: PIs. 8; 8b; 31).

Origin. Canaanite. The inverted nb sign is characteristic of EMBCS. 144 Furthermore, such a fourtiered composition with a pair of signs, one of them upside down, and in the same type of scroll border is also known on an EMBCS.145 The same pairs of signs, but in reverse order, appear on another EMBCS item, which was purchased in Jerusalem. 146

Date. As an EMBCS this scarab should be dated to the beginning of the MB lIB, between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

26. Scarab (Reg. No. 35; IAA 81-2019; Fig. 3.26). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the beetle's head. Dimensions. L 20.25 mm, W 14.5 mm, H 8.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Complete.


Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, there is an inner vertical oval occupied by three opr-beetles [L 1],147 and the 'belt' between the two ovals is occupied by a continuous scroll border.

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufuell's design classes ID, "Linear Patterns, Animals and Insects", and 7 A2a, "Scroll Borders, Continuousoblong, hooked" (TufnellI984: PIs. 1; 29). According to Keel's further refinement of Tufnell's design classification, design class ID of the TBM scarab should belong to Type 9A Skarabaus (Keel 1995: 162, 189-190, §§ 516-517).

Origin. Canaanite. The upside-down upper beetle and the perpendicular position of the central beetle indicate a non-Egyptian origin. The placement of the beetles, within an oval, point to the chronological proximity between the manufacturing date of this scarab and that of the original products. As the originals were produced during the Middle Kingdom,148 it is clear that the TBM scarab is an EMBCS.149

Date. As an EMBCS this scarab should be dated to the beginning ofMB lIB, between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

27. Scarab (Reg. No. 29; IAA 81-2020; Fig. 3.27); Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the beetle's head and sides. Dimensions. L 14 (est. 14.5) mm, W 8.5 (est. 9.25 mm), H 5.25 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Excellent.

138 BARUCH BRANDL

Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Broken, the left side of the beetle is missing.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 1, EP 45, Side 13; Tufuell-D3-II-e9.

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, five hieroglyphic signs are rendered in three columns: Each side is occupied with a dsrt or 'The Red Crown of Lower Egypt' [S 3];150 the one on the left is upside down and together they create a tetebeche composition. The central column contains three superimposed signs. The upper sign is /:tm, 'majesty' [U 36]151 or perhaps the sign s~, 'protection' [V 18].152 The middle sign is an e', 'arm' [D 36]153 and the lower is a !;e' sign, 'hill of the sunrise' [N 28].154

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufuell's design class 3B3e, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Symmetric Patterns-Red Crown tetebeche" (cf. Tufuelll984: PIs. 13:1576, 1586, 1587).

Origin. Canaanite. The clumsy shape of the e' sign points to a non-Egyptian origin. 155

The scarab seems to belong to the EMBCS group, since a scarab found in the Tel Aviv Harbor Cemetery bears such a depiction of 'The Red Crown of Lower Egypt' in tete-bechel56 and also has the same scarab features. 157

Date. The scarab belongs to the EMBCS group, and as such should be dated to early MB 1m, between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

28. Scarab (Reg. No. 34; lAA 81-2015; Fig. 3.28). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 14 mm, W 9.75 mm, H 6.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete, with two scars on its back.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC(?), EP 5, Side 27(?); Tufuell-B6-0-d5(?).

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, there are four hieroglyphic signs. In the center is the sign bit, 'bee' [L 2]158 above the sign ye', 'hill of sunrise' [N 28]159 flanked by eon!;, 'live' signs [S 34].160

Typology. Design scarab. The scarab belongs to Tufuell's design class 3A3, "Egyptian Signs and Symbols, Varia" (TufuellI984: PIs. 8:1347; 8b:142l, 1424).

Origin. Canaanite. The!;e' sign in the center of the base is typical ofEMBCSI61 and early LMBCS.162 A scarab from Tell el-' Ajjul with a very similar bee is similarly dated. 163

Date. The scarab seems to belong to the earlier group of the LMBCS, and as such should be dated between 1650 and 1590 BCE.

29. Scarab (Reg. No. 27; IAA 81-2000; Fig. 3.29). Material. Enstatite. The base is gray, the sides and edge of the back are creamy. Dimensions. L 15 mm, W 10.75 mm, H 6 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and heating. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching. Typical 'firing mark' on the central strap of the back. Preservation.' Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 31,164 EP 5, Side 42(?);165 Tufuell-D8 (?)-O-e 11.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, the motif known as 'the symbol of Hathor' (or, less specifically, der Gottinnenkopf:fetische)166 is depicted.

The symbol is composed of a long handle that supports a woman's head with pronounced ears, a curly coiffure, which resembles two confronted uraei, and two feather-like objects emerging diagonally up. Between these objects the triangular space is occupied by a stemless lotus flower. 167

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufuell's design class 10D2, "Human and Mythical Figures, 'Hathor' symbol" (cf. Tufuell 1984: PI. 48:2865, 2868, 2870). According to Keel's sub-division of Tufuell's design


classification, design class 10D2 of the TBM scarab should be lOAli, Gottinnenkopf (Keel 1995:162, 212-213, §§ 577-578).

The scarab fits Type E of Schroer's detailed study of scarabs bearing the goddess' head motif (Schroer 1989:139-146). On that type, the goddesses have a hairdo with two heavy 10cks,168 frequently referred to as 'Hathor's hair dress' .169

The TBM scarab, however, is a new variant in this small group, as it is the first that is related to Schroer's Type B scarabs (those with the two feather-like objects on the goddess' head)170 and also the first that bears a clear stemless lotus flower above the head.l7l

Origin. Canaanite. A typical 'Hyksos', or LMBCS product.

Date. The scarab is clearly identified as a LMBCS, and as such should be dated between 1650 and 1530 BCE.

30. Scarab (Reg. No. 40; IAA 81-2016; Fig. 3.30). Material. Glazed steatite. Yellowish glaze, nearcomplete coverage (see below). Dimensions. L 16 mm, W 11 mm, H 7 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear, hollowed-out engraving with hatching and crosshatching. Typical 'firing mark' on the central strap of the back. Preservation. Complete, except a small scar on the rear ofthe base.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 28,172 EP 5, Side 27; Tufnell-D8-0-d5.

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, there are three signs: a falcon or hawk [G 5]173 stands between two confronted i'rt, uraei (or cobras) [I 12].174 The motif on this scarab is very frequent; such scarabs are known from Canaan, Egypt and Nubia.

Canaan: 175 Gezer-two scarabs and a seal impression (Macalister 1912 III: PIs. 207:41; 208:19; 209:67); 176 Megiddo-three scarabs (Guy and Engberg: 1938: PI. 137:3; Lamon and Shipton 1939: PI. 67:23; Loud 1948: PI. 150:79); el-Jisr (Ory 1945: PI. 13:52); 'Amman (Ward 1966:7, J. 6229; PI. 19:J 6229); Shiloh

(Buhl 1969:37-38, Fig. 12: 195); Barqai (Gophna and Sussman 1969:10, No.3; 12, Fig. 10:3); Shechem (Hom 1973:284-286, Fig. 1 :66); Tel Gerisa (Giveon 1988:64-65, No. 66).

Egypt: Tell el-Yahudiyeh-two scarabs (Griffith 1890: PI. 10:14; Petrie and Garrow Duncan 1906: PI. 9: 154 = Petrie 1925: PI. 15: 1 013); Memphis (Petrie 1925: PI. 34: 10); Mostagedda (Brunton 1937: PI. 69:37).

Nubia: Sanam (Griffith 1923: PI. 27:60); Mirgissa (Vercoutter et ai. 1970:235 [7d], PI. 26:5).

It seems that this motif was very popular, and perhaps had some symbolic meaning; it appears with various additional signs on scarabs from Canaan, Egypt and

'Nubia:

1. With a ntr [R 5] behind the falcon: Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie et ai. 1952: PI. 10:124 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 37:2550 = Keel1997:49~95, No. 1151). 2. With an additional uraeus below the one on the right: Capemaum (Corbo and Loffreda 1985:385,387, Fig. 5:7). 3. With an additional uraeus and a winged solar disc above the motif: Tell el-Dab'a Stratum DI2 (Mlinar 2001:522-524 [TD 914]). 4. With a decorated oval above the motif: 'Amrit (Giveon 1985:140-141, No.7). 5. With a nb sign below the motif: Tell el-'Ajjul (Tufnell 1984: PI. 37:2551); Megiddo (Loud 1948: PI. 152:191); 'Akko (Giveon and Kertesz 1986:20-21, No. 56 = Keel 1997:552-553, No. 62); Ashkeit (SaveSOderbergh 1989:109, Fig. 35, PI. 45); Ukma (Andreu 1987:229 [50/1]). 6. With a nb sign below, and two additional uraei above the motif: Tell el-'Ajjul (two scarabs-Petrie 1931: PI. 13:29,59 = Tufnell1984: PI. 37:2557,2555 = Keel 1997:114-115, No. 28; 122-123, No. 53); Megiddo (Lamon and Shipton 1939: PI. 69:54 = Keel 1989: 269, Ill. 79); Pella (Richards 1992:100-101, No. 21); Mayana (Petrie and Brunton 1924a: PI. 43:23). 7. With a crocodile below the motif: 177 Jericho (Tufnell 1984: PI. 37:2545); Gezer (Giveon 1985:118-119, No. 28 = Keel 1989:274, Ill. 109); 'Akko (Giveon and Kertesz 1986:22-23, No. 68 = Keel 1989:274, Ill. 110; 1997:604-605, No. 209); Tell el-Dab'a Stratum D/3 (Bietak 1968: PI. 32:c [lower row, second from left] = Keel 1989:274 Ill. 108, 280 = Bietak, Mlinar and Schwab 1991:246-247, Ill. 211:2 = Mlinar 2001: 420-422 [TD 702 (791)]).

140 BARUCH BRANDL·

8. With an additional, confronted falcon: Tell el-' Ajjul (Petrieetal. 1952: Pl.10: 126 = Tufnell 1984: Pl. 37:2558 = Keel 1997:496-497, No. 1152). 9. With an additional, confronted falcon and a nb or nbw at the top: Tell el-'Ajjul (petrie 1934: Pl. 7:199 =

Tufnell· 1984: Pl. 37:2559 = Keel 1997:362-363, No. 759); Gezer (Giveon 1985:118-119, No. 27), the Baq'ah Valley (Weinstein 1986:284-285, 289, Fig. 93:3); Kenna (a seal impression; Reisner 1923:76, Fig. 169:116). 10. With an additional, confronted falcon and a nb below, while the two uraei are pushed up: Shiloh (Buhl 1969:37-38, Fig. 12:196).

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design class 9C3, "Animals and Heraldic Beasts, Cobras confronted-with hawk(s)" (cf. Tufnell1984: Pl. 37).

Origin. Canaanite. It is a typical 'Hyksos' product, or LMBCS.

Date. The scarab clearly belongs to the LMBCS group, and as such should be dated between 1650 and 1530 BCE, more plausibly in the latter part of this range, between 1590 and 1530 BCE.

31. Scarab (Reg. No. 30; lAA 81-2014; Fig. 3.31). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions, on the back and on the plates on the beetle's head (not indicated in drawing). Dimensions. L 12 mm, W 8 mm, H 5.25 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Nearly complete, the clypeus is missing.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 2, EP 5, Side 27; TufnellA4-0-d5.

Base Design: In a: vertical oval in the shape of a twisted rope, which serves as a frame, a large bpr, 'dungbeetle' is depicted [L 1]178 with an oval r(', 'sun disc' [N 5]179 'above', or actually in front of its head (instead of the dung ball). The beetle has a very prominent clypeus in the shape of a blossom. 180

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design classes 1D, "Linear Patterns, Animals and Insects", and 8A, "Rope Borders, Twisted Strand" (cf. Tufnell 1984: PIs. 1:1023-1026, 1030; 34:2411). Keel's modifications redefme Tufnell's class 1D as a new design class: 9ASkarabiius (Keel 1995:161, 189-190, §§ 516-517).

Origin. Canaanite.181

Date. The scarab is clearly identified as LMBCS, on the basis of its shapel82 and its excavated parallels. As such it should be dated between 1650 and 1530 BCE, more plausibly between 1590 and 1530 BCE.

32. Scarab (Reg. No. 33; lAA 81-2009; Fig. 3.32). Material. Faience, frit or glass. 183 The core is white and the surfaces black. Dimensions. L 15.5 mm, W 10.5 mm, H. 8 mm. Method of Manufacture. Molding, perforating, incising and firing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, the hole was made by pulling a straw or metal rod. Preservation. Complete, but the surfaces are heavily worn.

Scarab Shape. The upper part is completely worn.

Base Design. Plain.184

Typology. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's design class 12B, "Uninscribed Scarabs" (cf. Tufnell 1984:40-41, 148).

Origin. Egyptian?

Date. It may belong to the latter range of the LMBCS group, and as such should be dated to between 1590 and 1530 BCE.

33. Scarab (Reg. No. 32; lAA 81-2008; Fig. 3.33). Material. Glazed steatite. Dark yellow color. Traces of white glaze on the rear. Dimensions. L 14.5 mm, W 11 mm, H 6.75 mm. Method of Manufacture~ Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good~


Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear, hollowed-out engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 58, EP 34, Side 26.

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, there is a central motif accompanied by four hieroglyphic signs and a space filler. The main motif is a walking (or pass ant) hybrid sphinx whose front is human and the rest leonine. The human part consists of a pharaoh's head and the lower part of his body. He has a false beard, wears a wig,185 and an i'rt, uraeus or cobra [I 12] emerges from his forehead. His legs (or, rather, the sphinx' forelegs) are schematic, and he is dressed in a kilt. The hind legs of the leonine part are naturalistic and the tail is curled backwards.

In front of the sphinx is a huge flowering reed, or the i sign [M 17],186 while above his back, and without any frame, the prenomen of Amenhotep III (Nb-m5't-W) is inscribed. 187 Behind the, sphinx is a space filler in the shape of a t or a nb sign. 188

Typology. The scarab belongs to the general group of seals and scarabs bearing 'Royal Names'.189


Date. On the basis of the royal name-Amenhotep III-the scarab should date to the first half of the fourteenth century BCE.

34. Scaraboid (no Reg. No.; lAA 84-2140; Fig. 3.34). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions, the back and the plates on the beetle's head (not indicated in drawing). Dimensions. L 14.5 mm, W 10.5 mm, H 6 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear, hollowed-out engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete.

Seal Shape. Special type. It has some comiiton features with Petrie's Back Types Y 20 and 35 (Petrie 1917: PI. 71); these are related to his Back Type X, of which several shapes equal Hall's Type K1 '(see above, scaraboid No. 13 from Tomb 100).

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, a 'pastoral' scene is depicted. The main motif is a crouching antelope with its head to the front. There is a branch above its back and another branch in front of it, under the head.

Typology. See above, scaraboid No. 13 (Tomb 100; Fig. 3.13).


Date. Like scaraboid No. l3 (Tomb 100; Fig. 3.13) this scaraboid dates to the first half of the fourteenth century BCE. 190

35. Scarab (Reg. No. 24; IAA 81-2002; Fig. 3.35). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 14 mm, W 10 mm, H 6.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear, hollowed-out engraving with hatching. Preservation: Almost complete, with two small scars on its base.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC?, EP 110,191 Side 26.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, a design is rendered, which seems to be one of the variants of the nomen of Ramesses II (R'-msj-sw, mrj Imn).192 In this variant all the words appear in their regular hieroglyphic forms without any use of rebus writing. 193

Typology. The scarab belongs to the general group of seals and scarabs bearing 'Royal Names'.194


Date. On the basis of the royal name-Ramesses lIthe scarab dates to the thirteenth century BCE.

36. Scarab (Reg. No. 39; IAA 81-2004; Fig. 3.36). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of green glaze in the lllClSlOns.

Dimensions. L 16.5 mm, W 12.5 mm, H 7.5 mm. '

142 BARUCH BRANDL

Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear, hollowed-out engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 15,195 EP 61, Side 36.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, there are three hieroglyphic signs, which may be interpreted as a phrase. On the left is the m?'t, 'truth' [H 6] holding the 'nl;, 'live',196 and consequently the sign on the right must be identified as swt, 'feather', which should be interpreted as Sw, 'the air-god Shu' [H 6].197 Below these two signs is a nb sign, 'lord' or 'all' [V 30].198 Together one should read here 'Shu [the] lord [of] Truth'. 199

Typology. This scarab belongs to the category of "scarabs bearing names and figures of gods" (Newberry 1906: PI. 41).

Origin. Most probably Egyptian;2oo imported to Canaan.

Date. The scarab belongs to the Nineteenth Dynasty on the basis of its HC, and as such should be dated to the thirteenth century BCE.

37. Amulet (Reg. No. 13; IAA 84-1303; Fig. 3.37). Material. Faience. Light blue or azure glaze. Dimensions. H 26 (est. 36.5) mm, W 12.5 mm, T 10 mm. Method of Manufacture. Molding, perforating, incising and firing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. The perforation must have been located on the rear of the neck (see reconstruction). Preservation. Broken. The head and most of the bead collar are missing.

Amulet Shape. The amulet is in the shape of a naked male dwarf with a pronounced belly and short bent legs. He is brandishing a knife in each hand and most probably wears a bead collar on his neck. The figure is depicted in the round, and like Egyptian statues it stands on a rectangular platfonn and has a supporting back pillar. Both the back pillar and the figure are not exactly upright, but slant slightly backwards.

Design. The figure should be identified as the Egyptian god 'Ptah the Dwarf' (god of the craftsmen), the protective god known by its Greek name Pataikos (as deduced from a reference by Herodotus).201

Typology. According to Hernnann's division of the Pataikoi amulets found in this country,202 the TBM amulet fits two of his groups or sub-groups: Group F: Pataikoi with collars (Hernnann 1994: 437-448 [1.26.F Patake mit Halskragen]); Group H: Pataikoi with knifes in their hands (Hernnann 1994:454-458 [1.26.H Patake mit Messern in den Handen]).

The missing head is a phenomenon typical to this type of objects, of both subgroups,203 since the neck, with the horizontal perforation, is their weakest point. 204

Origin. Egyptian or Phoenician; imported to the kingdom of Judah.

Date. According to the parallels from Megiddo, Bet She'an and Tell Abu Hawam (Hernnann 1994:454) the TBM amulet should be dated to the tenth-first half of the ninth centuries BCE.

Archaeological Context of the Tomb 510 Items The dates ofthe earlier glyptic items in this tomb (Nos. 17-32) fit nicely with those of the other finds from this burial cave, dated to late MB IIA-MB IIC (= late MB IIB; see Chapter 2). However, the glyptics represent three more periods of use (the Eighteenth, Nineteenth and Twenty-first-Twenty-second Dynasties), not otherwise represented in this tomb. Here it should be borne in mind that according to Ben-Arieh (see Chapter 2), part of the finds from Tombs 500 and 510 may have been mixed during registration. As Tomb 500 contained chiefly LB II and Iron II pottery, it is highly likely that the later glyptic finds attributed here to Tomb 510 belong in fact to Tomb 500.

Tomb 1

38. Bifacial Oval Plaque (Reg. No. 114; IAA 84-1275; Fig. 3.38). Material. Glazed steatite. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 18 mm, W 12.5 mm, T 4.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing.


Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear; hollowed-out engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete.

Seal Shape. Bifacial oval plaque.205 The seal belongs to Keel's Type II~"oval, double sided inscribed piece with smooth sides" (Keel 1995:84, § 204).

Base Design. The seal has two decorated faces; 'Face A' is the main one. 'Face A': In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, an inscription is enclosed. On the right is a vertical cartouche with the prenomen of Amenhotep II ('3-!;prw-RC"). Behind the cartouche a huge goose or pintail duck is depicted,206 read phonetically as S5, 'son' [G 39],207 and above its back and tail is the name of the god Imn-R' 'Amun-Ra' .208

Together, the reading should be 'Amenhotep II, son of Amen-Ra'.209 The disproportionate size of the goose and its central location was explained by Sliwa as stemming from the fact that the goose is also one ofthe symbols of Amun.2lO 'Face B': In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, there is a motif consisting of three components: The central component is a vertical cartouche, the entire space of which is occupied by the sign nfr, 'good' [F 35].211 The space around the cartouche is filled with thirteen ring-and-central-dot designs.212

Typology. The plaque belongs to the general group of seals and scarabs bearing 'Royal Names'.2l3 It is also part of a more restricted group of plaques, which comprises, inter alia, bifacial rectangular plaques214

bearing a royal name in an oval or a cartouche, the huge goose and the name of the god Amun-Ra.215 This latter group was produced for six or seven decades, during the days of Thutmose III, Amenhotep II, Thutmose IV and Amenhotep III. 216

Most of the geese in that group have pronounced knees. The TBM plaque lacks this characteristic, similarly to a plaque bearing the prenomen of Thutmose III,217 and to a scarab bearing the prenomen of Thutmose Iy'218

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan. It may have been produced in the same workshop as the Matmar plaque.

Date. On the basis of the royal name~Amenhotep II~the seal is dated to the last third of the fifteenth century BCE.

39. Scarab (Reg. No. 131; IAA 84-1270; Fig. 3.39). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions. Dimensions. L 17.5 mm, W 13 mm, H 8 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear; hollowed-out engraving with hatching. Preservation. Broken. The base is broken in three places, the front is partially damaged.

Scarab Shape. Rowe~HC 11, EP 33, Side 26.

Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, two pairs of cobras are interlocked with a cross design.

Typology. Design scarab. This motif originated most probably from Tufnell's design class 6B1, "Coiled and "Woven" Patterns, Convoluted~coils" (cf. Tufuell 1984: PI. 24:2070, 2073, 2075), which appears on LMBCS.

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan. One parallel was excavated at Esna219 and another is in the Egyptian Collection of University College, London.220 In Canaan one parallel was found, at Gezer.221

Date. On the basis of TBM bifacial oval plaque No. 10 (Tomb 100; Fig. 3.10) and a variant in the British Museum,222 both of which bear the same name~Amenhotep II~the scarab should be dated to the last third of the fifteenth century BCE.

40. Bifacial Rectangular Plaque (Reg. No. 84; IAA 84-1265; Fig. 3.40). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of blue-green glaze, mainly on the decorated faces. Dimensions. L 15.5 mm, W 11 mm, T 4.25 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good to excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear; hollowed-out engraving with hatching.

144 BARUCH BRANDL

Preservation. Complete. Most of the glaze has vanished.

Seal Shape. Bifacia1 rectangular p1aque.223 The seal belongs to Keel's Type II, "rectangular, double sided inscribed typical Egyptian piece, with smooth sides" (Keel 1995:90-91, §§ 220-221).

Base Design. The seal has two decorated faces, 'Face A' being the main one. 'Face A': In a horizontal rectangle, which serves as a frame, a human-headed sphinx couchant is depicted, with a lion's body. He has a false beard, wears a nms, the royal headdress,224 and an i'rt, uraeus or cobra [I 12] emerges from his forehead. Around its neck is a collar, the tail is curled backwards and above its head is the solar disk. In front of the sphinx is a segmented 'no-sign, 'live' [S 34].225 A horizontal oval above its back contains the prenomen of Amenhotep III (Nbm:;'t_R')226 in which the sign m:;'t is in the form of a feather. 227

'Face B': In a vertical rectangle, which serves as a frame, a seated baboon is depicted, with a lunar disk above its head-one of the representations of the god l)/:twty, 'Thoth'. It sits above a nb-sign [V 30], and in front of it is the sign m:;'t, 'truth' [H 6], shaped like a feather. In the upper right comer the sign mri, 'love' or 'beloved of' [U 6] is rendered diagonally.228 It seems that the nb and m:;'t signs represent the prenomen of Amenhotep III (Nb-m:;'t-R,), which is also known to appear without a cartouche.229

One component of the attribute of Thoth-the disk without the moon crescent-could be 'read' also as the sun disk or the attribute of the god W, 'Ra'. Thus the inscription on 'Face B' should be read as Nb-m:;'tW mri D/:twty, 'Amenhotep III beloved of [the god] Thoth'.

Typology. The plaque belongs to the general group of seals and scarabs which bear 'Royal Names'.230 Each face can be assigned to a more restricted group: 'Face A' belongs to a group of bifacial rectangular plaques which bear a sphinx couchant, in front of which is the sign 'no, and the royal name (either in an oval or in a cartouche) is placed above its back.23 !

'Face B' relates the plaque to a small group of scarabs on which the name of the pharaoh is accompanied by the epithet 'Beloved of the god Thoth'.232

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan, most probably from Thebes.

Date. On the basis of the royal name-Amenhotep III-the seal is dated to the first half of the fourteenth century BCE.

41. Scarab (Reg. No. 92; IAA 84-1273; Fig. 3.41). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of green glaze in the incisions. Dimensions. L 15.5 mm, W 11.75 mm, H 7.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Mediocre. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear; hollowed-out engraving. Preservation. Almost complete, the clypeus is missing.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 11, EP 33, Side 26.

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, an inscription is rendered. On the right is the name of the god Imn-R', 'Amun-Ra',233 while the remaining third on the left is occupied by the signs nfr, 'good' [F 35]234 and 'no, 'live' [S 34].235

This combination is very rare.236 Possibly it is a forerunner of similar combinations appearing on a scarab and on some molds for faience finger rings from Amama, where the god's name is that of Aten.237

Typology. This scarab belongs to the category of "scarabs bearing names and figures of gods" (Newberry 1906: PI. 41:3, 4, 30).

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan, most probably from Thebes.

Date. On the basis of the resemblance of the formula to a scarab and several faience finger rings or their molds found at Amama, I suggest dating the scarab to the days of Amenhotep III, or to the first half of the fourteenth century BCE.

Archaeological Context of the Tomb 1 Items The rest of the finds in Tomb 1 were attributed mainly to LB II (possibly starting in late LB I) and to Iron II (see Chapter 2). The dates of the scarabs and the seals thus fit only part of this range.


Tomb 2

42. Scarab (Reg. No. 37; lAA84-1373; Fig. 3.42). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the plates on the beetle's head. Dimensions. L 16 nun, W 11 nun, H 6.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Worlananship. Excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Complete.


Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, a vertical motif is depicted, composed of geometric elements: From a small circle in the center a long 'column' emerges upward, with a perpendicular and shorter 'beam' on top ofit.238 The same combination is repeated, upside-down, in the lower part of the design. From the center also emerge four curved 'branches', each linked to a set of concentric circles (composed of three rings). Two additional, but unconnected such sets flank the small central circle.

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design classes 4B3, "Concentric Circles, Linked-triple ring", and 5, "Cross Patterns" (cf. Tufnell 1984: PIs. 21:1957; 22:2023).

Origin. Canaanite. The closest parallel, but where the small central circle is replaced by concentric circles, was found in Tomb D 6 [Group II] at Jericho (Kirkbride 1965: Fig. 283:15 = Tufuell 1984: PIs. 21:1957; 22: 2023). Two more 'relative parallels' were found at Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1934: PI. 5:2, 62 = Tufnell1984: PIs. 21:1964, 1966; 22:2046, 2053 = Keel 1997: 294-295, No. 563; 314-315, No. 623). All these are local and belong to the EMBCS group.

Date. The scarab should be attributed to the EMBCS group, and as such dates between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

43. Scarab (Reg. No. 105; IAA 84-1374; Fig. 3.43). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of yellowish glaze in the incisions and on the plates on the beetle's head.

Dimensions. L 15.5 mm, W 11 mm, H 7 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Worlananship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving. Preservation. Complete.


Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, there is a vertical motif composed of geometric elements. On the right and left are two columns, each comprising three double-ring concentric circles, which are linked by short, diagonal lines. Thus each column resembles two vertically-interlocking s-shaped spirals. In addition, the top of the left column is linked to the bottom of the right one by a diagonal s-shaped curve.

Typology. Design scarab. It seems to belong to Tufnell's design classes 2B1, "Scrolls and Spirals, Round interlocking spirals, with ends", and 4B2, "Concentric Circles, Linked--double ring" (cf. Tufnell 1984: PIs. 5:1170,1172,1181,1203,1208; 21:1923). However, no exact parallel to the TBM scarab appears in Tufnell's plates.

Origin. Canaanite. The closest parallel among the design class 4B2 scarabs was found at Byblos in the 'Montet Jar'239 and is considered an import from Egypt.

Close parallels among the design class 2B 1 scarabs occur in Late Middle Kingdom contexts in Egypt240 and Nubia.241 In Canaan they even continue to the early Hyksos period.242 It seems that the combination is a local innovation, and thus the earliest possible date for it is the beginning of MB lIB.

Date. The scarab seems to belong to the EMBCS group, and as such should be dated between 1680 and 1650 BCE.

44. Scarab (Reg. No. Ill; IAA 84-1375; Fig. 3.44). Material. Diorite? Grayish, with black dots.243 Dimensions. L 23 nun, W 16 mm, H 9.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling and incising. Worlananship. Good.

146 BARUCH BRANDL

Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching and crosshatching. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 1, EP 5, Side 19; TufnellD3-0-elO.

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, a combat scene is depicted, of a lion trampling a crocodile.

The crocodile occupies approximately one-fourth of the space. Its mouth is closed, the eye is pronounced and the legs are clearly depicted. The body is decorated by a branch motif,244 while the tail, which curves with

the scarab's frame, is hatched.245

The lion occupies approximately one-third of the space. Its body is filled with short strokes,246 the mouth is open and it seems that the beast is roaring.247 The tail is turned up following the frame's curve and it ends with a tuft. 248

The lion is depicted as stepping on the crocodile. The fact that only one of its front legs is depicted is a peculiar phenomenon;249 it compresses the eye and mouth of the crocodile.250 The whole scene is very compact, and this impression is enhanced by crosshatching in the space above the lion's back.251

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design classes 9D, "Animals and Heraldic Beasts, Crocodiles", and 9E, "Animals and Heraldic Beasts, Lions" (cf. Tufnell1984: PIs. 39:2590,2597; 40:2627, 2635). According to Keel's modified sub-division of Tufnell's design classification, the new and combined design class of our scarab should be 9E2c Lowe iiber krokodil (Keel 1995:161, 198, § 541).252

Origin. Canaanite. Typical 'Hyksos' design.

Date. On the basis of the above-mentioned parallels to the lion's shape and to the design filling its body, the scarab belongs either to the earlier LMBCS group, or to its later part, and thus could date between 1650 and 1530 BCE.

45. Scarab (Reg. No. 93; IAA84-1376; Fig. 3.45). Material. Enstatite. Gray. Dimensions. L 15.5 mm, W 10 mm, H 6.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and heating.

Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving with hatching and crosshatching. Preservation. Complete.


Base Design. In a vertical oval, which serves as a frame, a standing male figure is depicted, dressed in a kilt and with shoulder-length hair. His head is rendered in profile and in his left hand he holds a branch, most probably of a palm tree,253 while his right hand is hanging alongside the body. The space in front of the legs and below the left hand is filled with a net pattem.254

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to Tufnell's design class 10A1a, "Human and Mythical Figures, Standing, human-headed holding palm" (cf. Tufnell 1984: PI. 42:2682, 2686).

Origin. Canaanite. Typical 'Hyksos' design.

Date. The scarab belongs to the LMBCS group, and as such should be dated between 1650 and 1530 BCE.

46. Fish-Shaped Seal (Reg. No. 93; IAA 84-1272; Fig. 3.46). Material. Glazed steatite. Traces of green glaze. Dimensions. L 15 mm, W 10.25 nml, H 5.5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear engraving and hollowed-out engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete. Only few traces of the glaze have survived.

Seal Shape. The seaP55 is shaped on four of its sides (except for the base and the rear) as the right half of a Tilapia fish.256 The fish is rendered in much detail. 257

In the lower part, the pectoral and the anal fins are carved in a three-dimensional mode. The rays of the dorsal and caudal fins are clearly carved. The eye and the gills below it are also nicely carved. The rim of the perforation, at the front, serves as the mouth. The scales are represented by four colunms of short strokes.


Generally speaking, fish-shaped seals are known in Egypt,258 Nubia259 and Canaan260 from the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty and apparently continue to the seventh century BCE.261 The 'TBM type', however, seems to have had a shorter time-span-the EighteenthDynasty period and possibly also the Nineteenth.262

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, the left side of which is straight and thus the 'oval' resembles a stele in shape,263 an inscription is engraved. In the center is the name ofthe god Imn-R', 'Amun-Ra'264 with additional, very thin nb signs, 'lord' or 'every' [V 30],265 flanking it vertically. These should be interpreted as space fillers.266

Typology. Seal-amulet, both on the basis of its shape-a sacred fish267 and according to the inscription that includes the name of a god.268

Origin. Egyptian; most probably imported from Thebes.269

Date. On the basis of the similarity of the inscriptions on the TBM and the Malkata seals, it is suggested here that the former be dated to the first half of the fourteenth century BCE.

47. Scarab (Reg. No. 93; lAA 84-2139; Fig. 3.47). Material. Faience. Green glaze. Dimensions. L 13.75 mm, W 9.5 mm, H 7 mm. Method of Manufacture. Molding, perforating, incising and firing. Workmanship. Mediocre. Technical Details. Perforated. Hollowed-out engraving. Preservation. Complete. Loosing part of its glazed surface.

Scarab Shape. Holbl's First Millennium Faience Scarab Type 1 (Holbl 1986:217-219, Typentafel III No.1 = Keel 1995:60, § 124, Ill. 72:11.1).

Base Design. The base has no frame and contains a disassembled motif-a Homs falcon with a flagellum [G 6] above a nb sign [V 30], on which the falcon (supposedly) stands.270

Typology. Design scarab. It belongs to the category of "scarabs bearing names and figures of gods" (cf. Newberry 1906: PI. 41).

Origin. Phoenician mass-production. One 'close' parallel was bought by Petrie from a worker at Tell' el-'Ajjul,271 and two more parallels272 come from the Punic necropolis of Arg el-Ghazouani (Dar Essafi) located northwest ofKerkouane, Tunis.273

Date. On the basis of the above-mentioned parallels from Kerkouane the scarab should be dated to the sixth century BCE or slightly earlier.

Archaeological Context of the Tomb 2 Items The dates of the scarabs and the fish-shaped seal from Tomb 2 fit those of the pottery vessels found there, dated to MB II, LB II and Iron II (see Chapter 2).

Tomb 803

48. Scarab (Reg. No. 2411; lAA 78-1490; Fig. 3.48). Material. Glazed steatite. Yellowish glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 17 mm, W 12 mm, H 6.25 mm. Method of Manufacture. Carving, abrading, drilling, incising and glazing. Workmanship. Good to excellent. Technical Details. Perforated, drilled from both sides. Linear, hollowed-out engraving with hatching. Preservation. Complete.

Scarab Shape. Rowe-HC 26,274 EP 5, Side l5(?).

Base Design. In a horizontal oval, which serves as a frame, a symmetric motif is rendered, all its components being hieroglyphic signs. In the center is a vertical cartouche with the prenomen of Thutmose IV (Mn-bprw-R'). Flanking it are two m5't or swt-'truth' or 'feather' [H 6] signs,275 placed back to back, from which emerge two i'rt, uraei (or cobra) [I 12].276 The small space left under the feathers is occupied by t

signs [X 1],277 which is quite a rare addition.278

Typology. The scarab belongs to the general group of seals and scarabs bearing 'Royal Names'.279 It also belongs to a much more restricted group of scarabs where the vertical cartouche is addorsed by a feather, from which the cobra emerges.280 To date three royal names are attested in this group: Thutmose III: At Gezer (Macalister 1912 11:321, No. 196; III: PI. 207: lla = Rowe 1936: No. 495 [the photograph is upside-down]); Lachish (Tufnell 1958:

148 BARUCH BRANDL

PI. 38:283); and Enkomi (Murray 1900:41, PI. 4: No. 694 = Hall 1913: No. 1563).281 Amenhotep III: Saqqara (E1-Khouli and Kanawati 1988:45, PI. 49 [S88:76(c)]).282 Ramesses II: Gurob (Loat 1905: PI. 4:7).

Therefore, the TBM scarab with the prenomen of Thutmose IV is an important addition to that group.

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan, most probably from Lower Egypt.

Date. On the basis of the royal name, Thutmose IV, and depending on the chronology employed, the scarab should be dated either to the two last decades of the fifteenth century or to the first decade of the fourteenth century BCE.

49. Bifacial Rectangular Plaque (Reg. No. 6411; IAA 78-1495; Fig. 3.49). Material. Faience. White glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. L 14.25 mm, W 10 mm, T 5 mm. Method of Manufacture. Molding, perforating, incising and firing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, the hole was made by pulling a straw or a metal barb. Hollowed-out engravmg. Preservation. Complete, with few small scars.

Seal Shape. Bifacial rectangular plaque.283 The seal does not belong to any of Keel's types. It is close to his Type III,284 but is not made of a black stone.285

Base Design. The seal has two decorated faces, and in this case it is difficult to select the main one. 'Face A': In a horizontal rectangle, which serves as a frame, a couchant winged griffin is depicted. 'Face B': In a horizontal rectangle, which serves as a frame, a capride is galloping.

Typology: Design seal.

Origin. Canaanite. It seems to belong to Keel's "Typ" III, depending on the attribution of the abovementioned Tell el-'Ajjul plaque to that group.

Date. Based on the association with Keel's Type III rectangular seals, particularly the Tell el-' Ajjul seal,

it is suggested here that the TBM seal be dated to the fourteenth century BCE.

50. Necklace Pendant (Reg. No. 38; IAA 78-1497; Fig. 3.50). Material. Faience. White and black glaze, complete coverage. Dimensions. H 16 mm, W 4 mm, T 2.75 mm. Method of Manufacture. Molding, perforating, incising and firing. Workmanship. Good. Technical Details. Perforated, the perforation was made by pulling a straw or a metal barb. Preservation. Complete.

Pendant Shape. One-sided, frontal pendant, with an upper suspension loop. It most probably formed part of a necklace or collar.286

Design. An Egyptian female figure, wearing a mediumlength robe, shown in profile, facing right, except for her hands. The suspension loop on her head may represent a perfumed cone.287

Typology. Egyptian female figure pendant.288

Origin. Egyptian; imported to Canaan, most probably from Thebes (like the fish-shaped seal No. 46), since there is a gap in the Egyptian imports to TBM between Amenhotep III and Ramesses II.

Date. Ifthe suspension loop is indeed a perfumed cone, it is suggested here that the TBM necklace pendant be dated to the fourteenth century BCE.

Archaeological Context of the Tomb 803 Items The dates of the three objects from Tomb 803 fit the LB II date assigned to the other finds in it (see Chapter 2).

CONCLUDING COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Objects

There is a conspicuous diversity in the types of objects: 37 scarabs (including one in a metal mounting); two scaraboids; four bifacial rectangular plaques; two bifacia1 oval plaques; one hemispherical seal; one fish-


shaped seal; one cylinder seal; one amulet; and one necklace pendant.

Materials

The 47 stamp seals and scarabs are made of eight different materials, both natural and artificial: glazed steatite--35 objects, with traces of yellow, white or green glaze; enstatite--3 objects; serpentine(?)-1 object; diorite(?)-l object; carnelian-l object; faience-3 objects; composition-2 objects; frit or glass-L object. The cylinder seal is made of faience/ sintered quartz, and the amulet and the necklace pendant are of faience.

The glaze had survived, in varying degrees, on all the objects made of glazed steatite, most probably depending on micro-climatic conditions and depositional environments in the burial caves.

Workmanship

Two general observations can be made in this respect: (1) The workmanship of the EMBCS is better than that of the LMBCS. (2) The workmanship of the Eighteenth-Dynasty seals is better than that of the Nineteenth-Dynasty products.

Origin

Most of the Middle Bronze Age seals are local (28 out of 31), while most of the Late Bronze Age seals are imported (14 out of 16), chiefly from Egypt.

Date

Regarding the Middle Bronze Age items, the following may be noted: (1) 13 scarabs belong to EMBCS, and 15 belong to LMBCS. (2) Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period royal or private-name scarabs are completely absent, which supports the identification of the Middle Bronze Age scarabs as local products.

Regarding the Late Bronze Age items: (1) Seals and scarabs with the names of Eighteenth- and NineteenthDynasty pharaohs-Amenhotep II, Thutmose IV, Amenhotep III and Ramesses II-are relatively abundant (which supports their identification as imported objects). (2) Scarabs or seals with the

name(s) ofThutmose III are absent. (3) There is a clear gap between objects of Amenhotep III and those of Ramesses II (the Amama period is not represented).

Regarding the Iron Age II items, the most significant phenomenon is their scarcity-two items only.

Archaeological Contexts

1. Chronologically speaking, the glyptics in each burial cave fit well with the other material media in them. 2. There was confusion in the recording of the glyptic material from Tombs 500 and 510 (see above and Chapter 2).

Further Comments

1. There is no repetition among the objects. The diversity is remarkable. 2. There is hardly any resemblance to the scarabs and seals found by Albright on the mound (but see scaraboid No. 13, from Tomb 100). 3. The glyptic finds from the burial caves correspond only to part of the stratigraphical/chronological sequence on the mound, that of Strata E--C2 and A. 4. Objects bearing the prenomens of Amenhotep II and Thutmose IV may reflect the military campaigns of those pharaohs to and through Canaan (Malamat 1961; Yeivin 1967; Giveon 1969; Weinstein 1981:12-14, Na'aman 1984; Der Manuelian 1987:45-92).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank Sara Ben-Arieh for inviting me to study and publish these finds. Mariana Salzberger photographed the objects and Josephinne Jaroshevich and Carmen Hersch drew them, each in her own style, but all under my guidance.

Special thanks are due to my colleagues Christa Mlinar and Daphna Ben-Tor for their helpful comments. I am grateful to Rachel Baharad, of the Object Conservation Laboratory in the Israel Museum, for examining the glaze remains under the microscope. Last, I would like to thank the editor of this volume, Ayelet Gilboa, and James M. Weinstein, who read an earlier version of this chapter, for their valuable contributions.

150 BARUCH BRANDL

NOTES

1 For the different methods of glazing steatite objects used in ancient Egypt, see Tite and Bimson 1989. 2 It seems to me highly likely that on eight of the EMBCS and on two early LMBCS (for these terms, see below) glaze of more than one color was used. Thus in the line drawings of these scarabs the darker glazed areas are marked by hatching. 3 See also Keel 1995:153, § 406. 4 For the heating of steatite for scarabs, see Noble 1969:438. For the transformation of steatite into enstatite, see BaynesCope and Bimson 1987:106; Keel 1995:147-148. 5 Cf. Hayes 1968:35-36 and Fig. 17. There are very rare instances of hatching and crosshatching on earlier scarabs (Tufnell 1975:74, n. 46; Keel 1995:130, § 327), but they seem to be within double-lined borders and appear less dense. 6 See for example Brandl 1993a:2ll-2l2, No.9, Fig. 8.9. 7 See diagrams showing the parts of the scarab beetle in Rowe 1936: PI. 23; Ward 1978: Frontispiece; Uehlinger 1990:62, Fig. 37; Keel 1995:20, Fig. 1. The last one is the most detailed, and the terminology is provided in German, English, French and Italian. 8 See also Keel 1995:39-57. 9 Due to this difficulty I chose not to discuss these features in several of my previous studies (Brandl 1984:60; 1986:247; 1993a:203; 1993b: 129). In the present publication, however, I decided to refer to the scarabs' features, as comparative data are still meager, and the features provide another means of refming the dating, albeit a secondary one, to the main consideration-the motifs on the scarabs. 10 On the history and development of Tufnell's design classification see Brandl 1986:247, n. 4. 11 For a short survey, see Keel 1995:158-162. 12 Such relatively close pairs appear on the upper and lower parts of a scarab from Tomb G46 at Jericho (Group II; Kirkbride 1965:603, Fig. 285:4; 604 = Tufne1l1984: PI. 21: 1935). 13 One may compare this vessel with those depicted on two 'Hyksos' scarabs (or LMBCS) found at Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1934: PI. 7:192 = Tufne1l1984: PI. 12:1571 ~ Keel 1997:360-361 [No. 752]) and at Tel Haror (Oren, Morrison and Gilead 1986:65, Fig. 15:11; Oren et aI. 1991:19 [photo]). Two scarabs in the Egyptian Collection in University College, London may be somewhat earlier than the TBM scarab (Petrie 1925:15, § 27, PI. 8:249; Ward 1978:54 and n. 208, PI. 7:206). 14 Three such pairs appear on a scarab from Tomb B 3 at Jericho (Group I; Kirkbride 1965:624, Fig. 293:1 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 21:1953). 15 See also Keel 1995:171, § 458. 16 Two small nb signs appear on the side columns of three scarabs from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1933: PI. 3:85 = Keel 1997:256-257, No. 453; Petrie et aI. 1952: PI. 9:85, 86 =

Keel 1997:484-485, Nos. 1111, 1112). 17 See also Keel1995: 172, § 458.

18 See also Keel 1995: 173, § 462. 19 See also Keel 1995:169, § 448. 20 A scarab from Mayana (petrie and Brunton 1924a: PIs. 40 [Group 1300]; 43:49) is a variant since it has an additional row of hieroglyphic signs on the top. 21 The only EMBCS bearing crosshatching was uncovered in Tomb 66 at Ruweise (Ward and Dever 1994: Fig. 5:1c:57). This scarab and three additional ones were identified by Daphna Ben-Tor as Canaanite, while the rest were identified by her as Egyptian (Ben-Tor 1997:187, n. 89). 22 See also Keel 1995:173, § 464. 23 Such cobra signs were found, inter alia, at Nubt (Petrie and Quibe1l1896: PI. 81:92,95, 110), Kahun (petrie 1890: PI. 10:54 = Tufne1l1975: Fig. 3:66), Uronarti (Reisner 1955: 65, No. 321 = Tufnell 1975: Fig. 5:247) and Elephantine (von Pilgrim 1996:247, I11. 103:202). Similar hatched snsigns were found at Kahun (petrie 1891: PI. 10:113 = Tufnell 1975: Fig. 4:243), Harageh (Engelbach 1923: PI. 20:78), Uronarti (Reisner 1955:63, Nos. 244-246; 66, Nos. 363, 368, 370; 68, No. 433) and Elephantine (von Pilgrim 1996:146, Ill. 102:161). 24 Such combinations occur in Gezer in Cave 2811 (Macalister 1912 1:129, No. 29; III: PI. 35:30 = Rowe 1936: No. 330), Tell el-'Ajjul (petrie 1931: PI. 14:152 = Tufne1l1984: PI. 8b: 1386 = Keel 1997:154-155, No. 146), in the Tel Aviv Harbor Cemetery (Leibovitch 1955: Fig. 6:8 = Ward and Dever 1994: Fig. 5:la:13), in Jericho Tombs D 6 (Group II Early; Kirkbride 1965: Fig. 283:21 = Tufne1l1984: PI. 8:1342) and J 9 (Group IV; Kirkbride 1965: Fig. 296:8 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 8:1331), and in Tomb 6 II, south of Tel Reb.ov (Yogev 1985:102-103, Fig. 3:11,109, PI. 18:13). 25 Such a twist, or central cable, appears on a sealing from Uronarti (Reisner 1955:61, No. 191 = Tufnell 1975: Fig. 9:377), and on scarabs excavated at Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1934: PI. 9:326 = Keel 1997:406-407, No. 887) and at Lachish in Tomb 1502 and Grave 157 (Tufnell 1958: respectively PIs. 30:19,24; 32:102; p. 61). 26 See also Keel 1995:171, § 454; 175, § 467. 27 Cf. a scarab from Jericho Tomb B 48 (Group II; Kirkbride 1965: Fig. 282:9 = Tufne1l1984: PIs. 1:1034; 10:1494). 28 Cf. Rowe 1936: No. 94. For the sign see also Keel 1995:172, § 459. 29 See also Keel 1995:171, § 453. 30 Two more interpretations of this sign are: (1) w3b, 'endure' [V 29], see Rowe 1936: Nos. 19,24, 119, 172,232,251,252, 334, 343-346, 349, 356, 357. (2) A reversed w3g, or papyrus column [M 13], see Ben-Tor 1997:171-172, Fig. 3:14. 31 Not to be confused with Tufnell's original desIgn class 11 C, "Names and Titles. Royal and Private names, doubtful readings" (TufneIl1984: PI. 50). 32 To these, two scarabs from 'Atlit may be added (Keel 1997:772-775, Nos. 38, 42). 33 To date, only two such scarabs from Egyptian sites have been published. One was found at Tell el-Yahudiyeh (Griffith 1890: PI. 10:1 = Hall 1913: No. 72 = Tufne1l1984:


PI. 51:3028 = Keel 1995: 241, Ill. 564) and the other at Tell er-Retabeh (Petrie and Garrow Duncan 1906: PI. 33:2B =

Petrie 1925: PI. 15:1035). Such a scarab in the collection of Dr. Grant Bey may also have been found in Egypt (petrie 1889: No. 709). 34 For a Middle Kingdom forerunner from Kerma, see Markowitz 1997:83-84, Fig. 3.8. 35 For a First Intermediate Period forerunner from Abydos, see Peet 1914: 71, PI. 37:[ A.5; fifth from left] = Petrie 1925:7, PIs. 4:264; 20:264; 29:[N 5A]). 36 Ben-Tor identified four of the scarabs in Tomb 66 at Ruweise (Nos. 2, 10, 18, 19) as Canaanite (1997:187, n. 89; 1998a:3). I suggest that scarab No. 1 should likewise be identified as a Canaanite product. 37 See also Kee11995: 170, § 451. 38 See also Keel 1995:173, § 463. 39 The only known parallel for this decorative element appears on a scarab from the former Lefkovitz Collection, which was published as a surface find from the mound of 'Akko (Tell el-Fukhar; Giveon and Kertesz 1986:10-11, No. 10 = Keel 1997:540-541, No. 26). Another scarab, where the lower 'hook' is filled in the same manner, was unearthed at Shechem (Hom 1962:9, Fig. 2:22, PI. 1:22). 40 Cf. a scarab from Lachish (TufnellI958: PI. 32:67). 41 This date supports the original date proposed by Giveon and Kertesz for the 'Akko scarab, contrary to Keel's later suggestions. 42 Erroneously described by its excavator as a scaraboid (Guy 1938: PI. 152:1). 43 Canaan: Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1931: PI. 14:185; 1934: PI. 9:392 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 22:1997, 1996 = Keel 1997: 164-165, No. 179; 424-425, No. 948, respectively). Egypt: Mayana (Petrie and Brunton 1924a: PI. 43:2, 20, 21, 26-28, 32,33,35,37,45). Nubia: Ukma (Andreu 1987:243 [226/13], PIs. 7, 8 [226113]). 44 And cf. a seal from Mayana Group 1300 (Petrie and Brunton 1924a: PI. 43:50). 45 The German term ovale platte (see for example Hornung and Staehelin 1976:37) was translated by Keel to English as 'oval piece' (Keel 1995:84-86). 46 See Gardiner 1973:75, 576. 47 See also Keel 1995:171, § 454. 48 This is one of the 16 most popular patterns on bifacial oval plaques of the Eighteenth Dynasty (see Jaeger 1982: 169-172 [No.7] = Keel 1995:85, § 208; 86, Ill. 145). 49 The closest parallel is a scarab from Tomb 35 in Cemetery 76A at Gedekol, Nubia (Firth 1912:122 [35.i], PI. 42b:15 =

Mlinar 1999: Ill. II/58:14). For another parallel with the prenomen of Thutmose III see Newberry 1906: PI. 18:11 = Jaeger 1982:326, n. 635, Ill. 835. 50 It is a nice addition to the 28 seals and scarabs with the name of Amenhotep II found in this country (see Keel 1995:235, § 634). 51 See Jaeger 1982:152-154, §§ 1137-1142 (variant [a]). 52 The only parallel (but whose provenance is unknown) is in the British Museum (Hall 1913: No. 1648). A close variant, where the sphinx is trampling on the prostrate body of a

prisoner, was found at Sedment (Petrie and Brunton 1924b: PI. 58:41 = Jaeger 1982:153, § 1138; 315, n. 502, Ill. 757; 324, n. 620, Ill. 825). 53 See also scarab No. 39, from Tomb 1. 54 For the use of the term 'sintered quartz' for describing the artificial material used in the manufacture of cylinder seals during the second and the first millennia BCE, see Collon 1982:5-6; 1987:61-62. 55 The suggestion that such seals were made in molds (NougayroI1939:13 [xxvi, n.l], PI. 1 [AH.l]; 27 [Ix]; PI. 5: [GR.4]; Schaeffer 1948:412) was ruled out since no vertical breaks in the design are observable (Collon 1987:62). For cylinder seals that were produced in bivalve molds, see Brandl 1999a:230-236. 56 The heads were made with a triangular engraver, the lower part of their body with a tabular drill head, and all the rest with a thick engraver. 57 There is an alternative interpretation-that the headdress is more likely to be a turban (Parker 1949: 13 [No. 32], 19 [No. 66]). 58 Some of the parallels (see below) were described as portraying nude figures (Parker 1949:13 [No. 32], 19 [No. 66],20 [No. 74],22 [No. 93]; Salje 1990:95, PI. 12: 215), but it seems to me that the circles represent folded kurti-like dresses. 59 Cf. Collon 1982:42, No. 10. 60 Cf. Teissier 1984: No. 581. 61 The preference for the representation of repeated elements, which form the only subject in the decorative field, is typical of the 'western' Mitannian cylinder seals (see Guardata 1986:16), but cf. also Nuzi seal impressions (Porada 1947: PI. 19:375-394). 62 Some of the Nuzi seal impressions could also be included under this definition (see Porada 1947: PI. 19:357-364). 63 One of the Nuzi seal impressions may also be included here (see Porada 1947: PI. 19:379). 64 And cf. also some Nuzi seal impressions (Porada 1947: PI. 19:375-377,383). 65 For another such cylinder seal, whose provenance is unknown, see Doumet 1992: No. 303. 66 See Rowe 1940:87 [No. 11]; Parker 1949:13 [No. 32]; Salje 1990:30, Pis. 1:5,37; 3:54, 55. 67 Mazar 1978:10 (No. 25). 68 Porada 1947:116-122. 69 Cf. Groups VIII and IX of the Nuzi seal impressions (Porada 1947:28-29, Pis. 19-21). For early depictions ofthis important human activity see Garfinkel 1998; 2003. 70 This is the simpler group within Frankfort's Mitannian "Popular Style" (Frankfort 1939:279-280). According to Helene Kantor (1968:82-84) the Canaanite group is itself a poor subgroup ofthe "Common Style", which she named the "Depleted Style" (see Beck 1967:2; Mazar 1978:10; Dabney 1993:228). 71 Cf. an impression from Kamid el-Loz (Kuhne and Salje 1996:65-66 [No. 23], with references to all the other items of that subgroup). 72 See Dabney 1993:228-231, esp. p. 229.

152 BARUCH BRANDL

73 For the date of the archaeological context of these two seals see Brown and McGovern 1986. 74 As such it joins the small group of Mitannian "Cornmon Style" cylinder seals that reached Syria and Canaan while the kingdom of Mitanni still existed (in some cases these seals are attested only by their local impressions). 75 The German term rechteckige platte (for example, Hornung and Staehelin 1976:37) was translated by Keel as 'rectangular piece' (Keel 1995:89-93). 76 Cf. a plaque from Lachish where the other side bears the nomen of the same ruler (TufnellI958: PI. 34: 171). 77 It is a welcome addition to the 125 seals and scarabs with the name of Amenhotep III that have been found in this country (see Keel 1995:235, § 634). 78 I intend to publish elsewhere a study devoted to this seal type, which I define as a 'turtle-shaped scaraboid'. 79 For example, Regner 1995:77-78, No. 252. 80 For Egypt, see a scarab from QaulBadari (Brunton 1930: PI. 19:36). For Canaan, see a scarab from Aphek (Giveon 1988: 50-51, No. 45 = Keel 1997:86-87, No. 22), a scarab from Tell Jemmeh (Petrie 1933: PI. 4:163) and three scarabs from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1931: PI. 14:86 = Keel 1997:130-131, No. 80; Petrie 1933: PI. 3: 109 = Giveon 1985:84-85, No. 69 =

Keel 1997:264-265, No. 477; Petrie 1933: PI. 4:164 = Keel 1997:282-283, No. 525). 81 Cf. a scarab from Gurob (Petrie 1890: PI. 23:74 = Petrie 1925:PI. 18:1400); not to be confused with instances where the front legs are bent under the antelope's body (see Keel 1995: Ills. 10,328,491,493). 82 See Newberry 1906: PI. 8:6; Eisen 1940: No. 181 =

Sotheby's Sale 6256: No. 148. 83 Such a plaque with the prenomen of Amenhotep II is kept in the British Museum (Hall 1913: No. 1652). 84 Such seals were encountered in several places in Canaan: TBM Stratum C2 (Albright 1932:38, Fig. 7:1 = Rowe 1936: No. 552), Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1933: PI. 3:48 = Keel 1997: 244-245, No. 417) and Gezer (Giveon 1985:116-117, No. 21). 85 Such a seal from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1933: PI. 3:48) was identified by Keel, due to its crude shape, as local (Keel 1997:244-245, No. 417). 86 Regarding the terminology for these seals, see above, n.75. 87 See also Keel 1995:172, § 459. 88 See Jaeger 1982:46, § 115. For another consideration of this depiction, see HOlbI1979:96-99, Ill. 1 [b/4-5]. 89 Cf. a plaque from Tell el-'Ajjul (but the other side there is different; Petrie 1931: PI. 14:128 = Keel 1997:146-147, No. 122) and a scarab from Tomb 901 at Tell el-Far'ah (South) (Petrie 1930: PI. 22:181). 90 One scarab with this title was uncovered at Koptos (Petrie 1896: PI. 24:73 = Petrie 1925: PI. 17:1292) and two more are in University College, London (Petrie 1925:21, PI. 12: 710-711). 91 Alternatively, it is possible to consider the design a lateral one and then the oval should be understood as horizontal (cf. Hornung and Staehelin 1976: Nos. 829, 834, 836, 837;

Zori 1977:21, PI. 8:3), but there are scarabs that indicate that the 'traditional', vertical option was the one favored (cf. at Aphek-Keel 1997:82-83, No. 12; and at Barqai-Gophna and Sussman 1969: Fig. 10:6). 92 For such an isolated lotus flower cf. an early Hyksos scarab from Tell Abu-Zureiq (Giveon 1988:20--21, No.3 =

Keel 1997:6-17, No.3). 93 For such linking devices, see Petrie and Quibell 1896: PI. 81:89 = Petrie 1925: PI. 16:1100. 94 This scarab (and No.7 on the same plate) could not be located in the Institute of Archaeology at the University of London (Price Williams 1977:92-96). 95 The TBM example was actually mentioned by Schroer, but not illustrated (Schroer 1989: 108 [025]; 204 [025]). 96 Daphna Ben-Tor (pers. comm.) suggests that this may be, an Egyptian product of the Late Middle Kingdom. 97 Indeed, there are in this tomb ceramic vessels attributed to MB IIA (see Chapter 2). 98 For the periodic use of carnelian for the scarab industry see TufnellI984:39. 99 Bel)det is a place name identified with Tell el-Balamun, the northernmost town of Egypt, or alternatively with Edfu in Upper Egypt (Gardiner 1973:564). 100 See also Keel 1995: 170, § 450. IOISee also Keel 1995:170 § 452. 102 See also Keel 1995: 172, § 461. I03Daphna Ben-Tor, pers. comm. However, there is a possibility that this sign originated from the upper part of the emblem of the god Mnw, 'Min'[R 22], which appears on private-name scarabs (cf. Martin 1971: Nos. 550, 558,1119, 1402). I04Cf. a scarab from Bet She'an, which was identified as bearing the name of Sesostris II (Rowe 1936: No. 10 =

Tufnell 1984: PI. 52:3037 = Keel 1995:231-232, Ill. 533); and a scarab from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1934: PI. 5:50 =

Rowe 1936: No. 98 = Tufnelll984: PI. 10:1524 = Keel 1997: 310-311, No. 611). 105 See above, scarab No. 15 from Tomb 500. 106possibly this combination should be read as B-m/:zw, 'Lower Egypt' or 'the Delta'. 107Keel corrected the unfinished original drawing in Petrie's report, where a leaf is missing. 108The same motif, but with triple-ringed concentric designs, appears on a late 'Hyksos' bifacial rectangular plaque found in Tomb B 24 at Aniba in Nubia (Steindorff 1935: PI. 31: 34). I09The forerunners of this sign exist on the ThirteenthDynasty genealogical scarabs of Sebekhotep IV; see, for example, a scarab from Nubt (Petrie and Quibell 1896: PI. 80:19). 1l0See also Keel 1995: 172, § 461. III See also Keel 1995: 172, § 459. 112 See also Keel 1995:171, § 458. 113 See also Keel 1995: 173, § 462. 114Rowe suggested that it is a solar disk between two uraei with united tails (Rowe 1936: Nos. 147, 170, 175). Tufnell identified the sign as the god W (Tufnell 1958: Nos. 135,


186), as did Keel (1995:240-241, I11. 559). Kirkbride identified it as the sign 30t, 'horizon' [N 27] (Kirkbride 1965: 595-596, Fig. 282:8; 602, Fig. 284:3; 603-604, Fig. 285:7; the first appears in Keel 1995:203, Ill. 384, and the two others in Tufnell 1984: Pis. 9:1447; 22:2002). Later, while describing the same scarabs Rowe had dealt with, Keel suggested that it may be a solar barque (Keel 1997:300-301, No. 582; 396-397, No. 856). Ben-Tor, who also dealt with this sign, did not offer any identification (Ben-Tor 1997: 171-172, Fig. 3:1-4; 1998b:157). For the forerunner, see Hayes 1953:343 (upper row, third scarab from the right). 115 This suggestion is supported, in my view, by a third element-a body of water-that sometimes appears under this sign, as on scarabs from the Harbor Cemetery at Tel Aviv (Leibovitch 1955: Fig. 6:16 = Ward and Dever 1994:99, Fig. 5:1a:18), Gibeon (Pritchard 1963: Fig. 70:21), Jericho, Group II (Tufuell 1984: PI. 9:1447) and Lachish (Giveon 1988:82-83, No. 93). For later appearances of this sign see also Brandl 1995. 116 See also Keel 1995: 1 72, § 460. 117 See also Keel 1995:169, § 449. lJ8See also Keel 1995:171, § 458. 119 See Ben-Tor 1997:171-172, Fig. 3:1-4. According to n. 46 there, in addition to the scarab in Fig. 3:3 there are four other scarabs from Rishon Le-Ziyyon which bear the same sign. Moreover, to the scarabs mentioned above one can add a scarab from Shechem (Wright 1957: Fig. 3 =

Hom 1962: No. 26), one from Hazor (Yadin et al. 1958: PI. 118 :31 = Tufuell 1984: 57, Fig. 17) and one in the British Museum, erroneously identified as bearing the prenomen of Amenhotep I (Hall 1913: No. 408). 12°For such a branch as a central motif cf. a scarab from Megiddo (Loud 1948: PI. 149:33 = Tufue1l1975: No. 39). 121 For such a division, see Tufuell 1958: PI. 36:212. For shorter dividers see Tufue1l1958: PI. 32:104. 122 See also Keel 1995: 170, § 452. 123 See also Keel 1995:171, § 453. 124For two other interpretations, see above scarab No.4, from Tomb 33. 125 See also Keel 1995:171, § 458. l26Cf. two scarabs from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1933: PI. 4:117; Petrie et al. 1952: PI. 10:99 = Keel 1997:266-267, No. 485; 488-489, No. 1125 = Tufuell 1984: PI. 8b: 1392, 1387 respectively); a scarab from Hazor (Yadin et al. 1958: PI. 118:31 = Tufnell 1984: Fig. 17), and another from Jericho, Group III (Kirkbride 1965: Fig. 292:9 = Tufne1l1984: PI. 9: 1452). l27Cf. a scarab from the Tel Aviv Harbor Cemetery (Leibovitch 1955: Fig. 6: 15 = Tufue1l1984: Fig. 16). 128See also Keel 1995:169, § 448. 129See also Keel 1995:171, § 458. 13°See also Keel 1995: 175-176, §§ 469-470; Richards 1996; 2001. I3lCf. a scarab from Lachish, Tufuelll958: PI. 30:53. 132 See Ben-Tor 1997:171-172, Fig. 3:9-12. 133See also Keel 1995:169, § 448. 134See also Keel 1995:171, § 456.

135See also Keel 1995: 173, § 462. 136 See also Keel 1995:174, § 465. 137Kirkbride 1965: Figs. 283:7; 292:18 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 28:2238,2237 respectively. 138Leibovitch 1955: Fig. 6:17 = Ward and Dever 1994:99, Fig.5:1a:19. 139See also Keel 1995:171 , § 458. 140See also Keel 1995:170, § 453. 141 See also Keel 1995: 170, § 450. 142See also Keel 1995:172, § 459. 143See also Keel 1995:169, § 449. 144 Cf. three scarabs from Tombs J 54 and D 6 at Jericho (Group II, early; Kirkbride 1965: Fig. 283:8,19,20 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 8:1325,1323,1327 respectively). 1450n a pre-Fifteenth-Dynasty scarab from Lachish (Tufnell 1958: PI. 32: 133). 146See Keel 1995:241, Ill. 565. 147See also Keel 1995:171, § 454. 148For two scarabs from the co-regency of Amenemhat III and IV, see Tufnell 1984: PI. 53:3091-3092 = Ward and Dever 1994:17, Fig. 2:4.7, 8 = Ben-Tor 1997:179-180, Fig. 9:10, 11). For a scarab from Tell el-'Ajjul related to Amenemhat IV, see Petrie 1933: PI. 4:116 = Rowe 1936: No. 101 = Tufnell 1980:38,40, Fig. 3:5,45 = 1984: PI. 53: 3093 = Ward and Dever 1994:99, Fig. 5:1a.5 = Keel 1997: 266-267, No. 484, with additional bibliography). 149For later appearances of three beetles on 'Hyksos' seals, see a scarab from Tel Michal (Giveon 1988:96, No. 114; 1989:342, Fig. 29.1.4, PI. 75:4) and a bifacial rectangular plaque from Kerma (Markowitz 1997:85, Fig. 3.9). ISO See also Keel 1995: 170, § 452. l5lSee also Keel 1995:171, § 453. 152For two additional interpretations, see above, scarab No.4, from Tomb 33. 153 See also Keel 1995:169, § 448. 154 See also Keel 1995: 170, § 453. 155Ben-Tor 1997:171-172. 156 Tufnell 1984:54-55, Fig. 16:10. 157TufueIl1984:54-55, Fig. 16:13. 158See also Keel 1995:170, § 450. 159See also Keel 1995:170, § 453. 160See also Keel 1995:169, § 449. 161 For example, two scarabs from Jericho (Groups II and III; Kirkbride 1965: Figs. 283:22; 290:10 = Tufnell 1984: Pis. 8:1347; 4:1619 respectively). 162E.g., a scarab from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie et al. 1952: PI. 9:81 = Tufuell 1984: PI. 14:1630 = Keel 1997:482-483, No. 1107). 163 See Petrie etal. 1952: PI. 9:82 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 11:1544 = Keel 1997:482-483, No. 1108. 164According to Rowe this type was first produced during the Hyksosperiod, or the Fifteenth Dynasty (Rowe 1936: PI. 32:31 = Keel 1995:42, Ill. 44:31). 165 According to Rowe this type was initially manufactured during the Hyksos period, or the Fifteenth Dynasty (Rowe 1936: PI. 35:42 = Keel 1995:53, Ill. 67:42). 166See Schroer 1989:139-199.

154 BARUCH BRANDL

167Cf. scarab No. 20, from Tomb 510. 168Schroer 1989:142-143, Nos. 88-93; 145; Keel1995:212, § 578. 169For a non-Egyptian origin for this type of coiffure, see Schroer 1989:174---185. 170See Schroer 1989:140-142, Nos. 61-76; Keel1995:212, § 578. 171Cf. a schematic stemless lotus flower on a Type B scarab from Tell el-'Ajjul (petrie 1932: PI. 8:136 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 48:2866 = Schroer 1989:141, No. 63), which was later related by Keel to Type C (Keel 1997:216-217, No. 339). 172 According to Rowe this type is exclusively Hyksos or Fifteenth Dynasty (see Rowe 1936: PI. 32:28 = Keel 1995:42, Ill. 44:28). 173See also Keel 1995:171, § 454; 174, § 467. 174For a variant from Megiddo, where one of the uraei is placed above the two other components, see Loud 1948: PI. 151:120. 175The scarabs from Tell el-Far'ah (South), Tell el-'Ajjul and Jericho were assembled by Tufnell in her design class 9C3 plate (TufneIl1984: PI. 37) 176 Another scarab, reportedly from the same site, is in the British Museum (Giveon 1985:120-121, No. 29). 177For a variant with an additional sign (a branch behind the falcon), see Hornung and Staehelin 1976: No. 800. 178 See also Keel 1995:171, § 454. 179See also Keel 1995:172, § 461. 18°Three very close parallels, with similarly-rendered clypei are known to me. One is a scarab from the last MB lIB stratum at Karnid el-Loz (KUhne and Salje 1996:134---135, No. 76, Ill. 23:76, PI. 18:76, Plan 13:76). The second is a scarab from Stratum D/3 at Tell el-Dab'a (Bietak 1981: PI. 34b [third row, second from right]; Mlinar 2001:449 [TD 709 (81)]), and the third is an unprovenanced scarab (Hornung and Staehelin 1976: No. 448). 181For an EMBCS forerunner, a scarab from Tomb J 54 at Jericho [Group II, early], see Kirkbride 1965: Fig. 283:11 =

Tufne1l1984: PI. 1:1026. 182 According to Rowe, HC 2 is dated to c. the Fifteenth Dynasty (see Rowe 1936: PI. 32:2 = Keel 1995:42, Ill. 44:2). 183 For the difficulty in identifying these artificial materials, see TufneIl1984:42; Keel 1995:149-151. 184This scarab was erroneously mentioned by Keel as an unfmished local product (Keel 1995:33, § 59), similarly to the 25 steatite pieces said to come from the same site and kept in the Reuben and Edith Hecht Museum at the University of Haifa (Cat. Nos. K 59/A-Y). i85Cf. a scarab in the British Museum (Hall 1913: No. 2231). 186See also Keel 1995:171, § 456. For the i sign in front of a walking sphinx cf. a scarab from Tell Jemmeh (Petrie 1934: PI. 11 :447) and a scarab in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo (Newberry 1907: PI. 7:36771). 187For such a variant of the king's prenomen, cf. a scarab in the British Museum (Hall 1913: No. 1866). For a scarab bearing only such a prenomen, see Hall 1913: No. 1897.

188Cf., for example, a scarab from Tomb 936 at Tell el Far'ah (South) (Starkey and Harding 1932: PI. 55:273 = Rowe 1936: No. 581) and another, unprovenanced (Hornung and Staehelin 1976: No. D17). 189To date, 125 seals and scarabs bearing the name of Amenhotep III are known from Canaan (see Keel 1995:235, § 634). 190 A scaraboid of a near-identical shape, found in Stratum VII at Tel Batash (which also dates to the same period) will be published by the author. 191 According to Rowe this type is exclusively of the Nineteenth Dynasty (Rowe 1936: PI. 34:110 = Keel 1995:45, Ill. 46:110). 192For the closest parallels see Pier 1906-1907:83 (No. 1460-identified erroneously as Ramesses III), 94, PI. 11: 1460; Matouk 1971:111, 195, Nos. 645, 678, 679. Close parallels from Canaan are a scarab from Tomb 984 at Tell el-Far'ah (South) (Starkey and Harding 1932: PI. 57:370 =

Rowe 1936: No. 686) and a bifacial rectangular seal from Tel Sokah (Kunath 1985). 193For rebus writing see Brandl 1982:372-375. 194It joins the 110 seals and scarabs bearing the name of Ramesses II known from Canaan (see Keel 1995:235, § 634). It is the first with the name of this ruler to be found at TBM, since the scarab that was determined by Albright as belonging to this pharaoh (Albright 1932:51, Fig. 9; 52, § 71) was later identified as a Seti II scarab (Brandl 1982:382-383, n. 57, PI. 4:23). 195 According to Rowe this type belongs to the EighteenthNineteenth Dynasties (Rowe 1936: PI. 32:15 = Keel 1995:42, Ill. 44:15). I suggest that this type was used exclusively during tp.e Nineteenth Dynasty (see Brandl 1 999b:20*, n. 23). 1965ee also Keel 1995:173, § 462. 197For the god Shu, see Ions 1968:46--47; Quirke 2001: 33-37,46. 1985ee also Keel 1995: 171, § 458. 199For the same type of HC, with the feather, which to me seems to represent the god Shu, see a scarab from Aphek (Keel 1997:80-81, No.7, with previous bibliography). 200 Although I maintain that scarabs with such a head type were also produced locally (Brandl 1999b:20*), the good quality of the glaze on this TBM scarab seems to indicate that it was imported from Egypt. 201 See, for example, Andrews 1994:39; Herrmann 1994: 404--407; Arav and Bernett 1997:203-213. 202To the 192 pataikoi listed by Herrmann (1994:406--407) two more should be added (Brandmann 1959; Yedaya 1969; both published in Hebrew). 203See Herrmann 1994: Nos. 598, 600, 602, 605, 611, 614, 624,626. 2040ur reconstruction of the head follows Herrmann's drawing of one of the Megiddo amulets (Herrmann 1994: No. 628)~ 205The German term ovale platte (see for example Hornung and Staehelin 1976:37) was translated by Keel as 'oval piece' (Keel 1995: 84---86). 206See, for example, Hall 1913:169 (No. 1706).


207See also Keel 1995:174, § 465. 208See also Keel 1995:242, § 642. 209This is one of the 16 most popular devices on bifacial oval plaques of the Eighteenth Dynasty (see Jaeger 1982: 169-171 [No. 11] = Keel 1995:85, § 208; 86, Ill. 145). 210See Sliwa 1985:20, No.7. For the geese of Am un see also Kayser 1958. 211 See also Keel 1995: 172, § 459. 212 A very close parallel was found at Matmar, where 15 such circles are arranged around an oval (see Brunton 1948: PI. 48:20 = Jaeger 1982:325, Ill. 831). 213It is an addition to the 28 seals and scarabs with the name of Arnenhotep II previously found in this country (see Keel 1995:235, § 634). 214See Keel 1995:89-90, §§ 216-219 ("Typ I"). 215 See also HolbI1979:98-101, Ill. 1 [g/3]. 216See Jaeger 1982:323, n. 615; 324-325, n. 623. 217See Reisner 1958: PI. 11:12847 = Jaeger 1982:171-172 [No. 894], Ill. 486; 324-325, n. 623, Ill. 830. 218This last scarab, originating in a tomb at Tell Rumeideh (Hebron), was published erroneously as belonging to Thutmose III (Keel and MUnger 2004:240-241 [No.1], 255 [No. 16]). 219 See Downes 1974:62 [218:2]. 22°Petrie 1925: PI. 8:278. 221 Macalister 1912 II:324 [No. 263]; III: PI. 207:45. 222 Hall 1913:162, No. 1645. 223The German term rechteckige platte (for example, Hornung and Staehelin 1976:37) was translated by Keel as 'rectangular piece' (Keel 1995:89-93). 224See Gardiner 1973:574, and cf. a bifacial rectangular plaque in the British Museum (Hall 1913: No. 1001). 225See also Keel 1995:173, § 462. 226This combination may be compared, for example, to that on a scarab in which the central figure is a passant lion (Hall 1913:185,No.1850). 227The prenomen is written in a similar way on scarabs from his palace at Malkata (Hayes 1951: Fig. 34: R 5,6,34,38). 228See also Keel 1995:171, § 457. 229Cf. n. 227, the above-mentioned scarab from Malkata (Hayes 1951: Fig. 34: No. R 38). 23°It is a welcome addition to the 125 seals and scarabs bearing the name of Arnenhotep III known to date from Canaan (see Keel 1995:235, § 634). 231 Cf. a bifacial rectangular plaque from Gezer with the prenomen ofThutmose III (Macalister 1912 II: 325 [No. 282]; III: PI. 208:14 = Rowe 1936: No. S.23). 232To the above-mentioned scarab from Malkata one can add the following: eight scarabs with the prenomen of Thutmose III (Jaeger 1982:53, § 168), three scarabs with the prenomen of Amenhotep II (Petrie 1889:36, No. 1106 = Petrie 1917: PI. 30 [18.7.23]; Newberry 1906: PI. 30:2 = Jaeger 1982:151, § 1130, Ill. 430; Hornung and Staehelin 1976:D3), and another with the prenomen of Thutmose IV (Hall 1913: No. 2878 = Giveon 1985:124-125, No. 47). 233 See also Keel 1995:242, § 642. 234See also Keel 1995:172, § 459.

235See also Keel 1995:169, § 448. 236The more common formula is nfr /:ls (or /:lz) (see Hornung and Staehelin 1976: No. 605, with bibliography). 237 See Petrie 1894: PIs. 15:122; 16:161-164. For actual rings see Hornung and Staehelin 1976: No. 385; Boyce 1995b:70, Fig. 2.13 (9021); 71, 72. 238These elements resemble the upper part ofthe hieroglyphic sign sm3, 'unite' [F 36]. 239Ward's suggestion, to date the 'Montet Jar' deposit to the early Twelfth Dynasty, was later confirmed by Ben-Tor (1998a: 14). 240 See Petrie and Quibelll896: PI. 81:82 (Nubt). 241Dunham 1967: Fig. 12:7 [32-1-141] (a seal impression from Mirgissa). 242In addition to the scarabs mentioned in Typology above, parallels are known from Gezer (Macalister 1912 III: PI. 209:47; Giveon 1985:120-121, No. 33), Bet She' an (Rowe 1936: No. 401) and Aphek (Keel 1997:88-89, No. 31). 243 A parallel from Gezer, mentioned below, is made from the same type of stone. 244Cf. a scarab from Tell el- 'Ajjul (see enlarged photo in Keel 1997:400-401, No. 868). 245Cf. the Tell el-'Ajjul scarab mentioned in the previous note and another from the same site (see enlarged photo in Keel 1997:196-197, No. 277). 246Cf. three scarabs from Tell el-'Ajjul (see enlarged photos in Keel 1997:234-235, No. 388; 258-259, No. 457; 320-321, No. 643), two scarabs from Jericho (Group V; Kirkbride 1965: Figs. 302:9; 303:16 = Tufuell 1984: PI. 40:2608, 2607 respectively) and three scarabs from Tell el-Far'ah (South) (Petrie 1930: PI. 7:32, 53; Starkey and Harding 1932: PI. 43:37 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 40:2612, 2615, 2613 respectively). 247Cf. a scarab from Tell el-'Ajjul (Keel 1997:234-235, No. 388) and another from Lachish (TufnellI958: PI. 30:42). 248Cf. a scarab from Tell el-Far'ah (South) (Petrie 1930: PI. 7:53). 249Scarabs where only one of the front legs of the attacking lion is depicted are known from Gezer (Petrie 1902:365, PI. 6:9 = Macalister 1912 III: PI. 202a:9), Tell el-'Ajjul (see enlarged photo in Keel 1997:128-129, No. 70) and Tell elFar'ah (South) (Petrie 1930: PI. 12:125). 250Cf. two scarabs from Tell el-Yahudiyeh (Griffith 1890: PI. 10:7, 8) and a 'Hyksos' scarab in the Metropolitan Museum, New York (Hayes 1968:36, Fig. 17 [third row from top, second from the left]). 251Cf. a scarab from Tell el-Far'ah (South) (Petrie 1930: PI. 7: 17), and see also scarab No. 45, from Tomb 2. 252A scarab from Tell Zakariyah (see photo in Keel 1997: 744-745, No. 26) may be added to the list of excavated scarabs belonging to this design class, compiled by Keel (1995:198, § 541). 253Cf. two scarabs from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1932: PI. 8:125; 1933: PI. 4:149 = Tufnell 1984: PI. 42:2686, 2682 = Keel 1997:212-213, No. 328; 278-279, No. 514 respectively) and one from Tell Keisan (Keel 1980: PI. 88:5; 1990:172-181, No.5).

156 BARUCH BRANDL

254Cf. a scarab from Tell el Far'ah (South) (Petrie 1930: PI. 7: 17), and see above, scarab No. 44, from Tomb 2. 255Some scholars prefer to describe this object as a fish scaraboid (See Keel 1995:68-69, § 151), and others, as a plaque with the back modeled in the shape of a fish (Hall 1913: Nos. 176,371,1164). 2560n the Tilapia see Brewer and Friedman 1989:76-79. 257For a diagram of fish morphology, see Brewer and Friedman 1989:47, Fig. 3.1. 258For example from Nag el-Kelebat (Boulos 1906:2, Fig. 3), Esna (Downes 1974:65 [320:1]) and Deir el-Bahri (Pinch 1993:287, Fig. 3 [second row-center]). 259For the seals from Faras, see Karkowski 1981 :94 [No. 20], 101 [No. 48], PIs. 6:20; 7:48. 26°For such a seal from Lachish, see Tufuell 1958: PI. 34: 170. 261 See Jaeger 1982:117, §§ 514-516; 189, § 1288; 210-211, §§ 1377-1383; Keel1995:68-69, § 151; Brandl1997:66-67, No. 132. 262See Jaeger 1982:117, § 514, Ill. 292; 336, n. 763, Ill. 865. For the latter, see Keel1995:69, § 151. 263Keel dubbed it U-jormiger Basis (Keel1995:69, § 151). 264See also Keel1995:242, § 642. 265 See also Keel1995:171, § 458. 266See Brandl1999b:18* (scarab No.1). 267 See Pinch 1993:287-288. 268For other gods on fish seals see Ptah at Tell el-Far'ah (South) (Petrie 1930: PI. 22:185; Starkey and Harding 1932: PI. 55:281) and the symbol or sistrum of Hathor (Murray 1953: PI. 45:132). 269 A similar fish seal, with the same inscription, was uncovered at the palace of Amenhotep III at MaIkata (Hayes 1951:233 [R 42], Fig. 34:[R 42]). Another, unprovenanced parallel is in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (Spalinger 1982). 27°Cf. a scaraboid from Cag1iari (Matthiae Scandone 1975: No. E5 = H61b11986: PI. 145:1). 271 See Petrie 1931:7, § 33, PI. 14:187 = Keel 1997:166-167, No. 181. 272See Redissi 1995:118, PI. II: 4, 5; Redissi and Tillot 1995: 149-150, PI. 2:4, 5. 272Redissi 1995: 115.

274 According to Rowe this side type appears exclusively on scarabs dated to the Eighteenth Dynasty (see Rowe 1936: PI. 32:26 = Keel 1995:42, Ill. 44:26). 275 See also Kee11995:173, § 462. 276For such isolated or independent motifs on scarabs see Petrie, Wainwright and Mackay 1912: PI. 20: 12; Brunton and Engelbach 1927: PI. 41:66 (Gurob); Hornung and Staehelin 1976: No. 759). 277See also Keel 1995:173, § 463. 278Cf. a scarab from Lachish (Murray 1953: PI. 43:3), and a bifacial oval plaque from Kom Rabi'alMemphis (Giddy 1999:72-74, PIs. 18,84 [EES 1845]). For such t signs under the wings of winged uraei see Hornung and Staehelin 1976: No. 255 = Jaeger 1982:101, § 448, Ill. 244; 174, § 1232, Ill. 497). 279To date 18 seals and scarabs with the name ofThutrnose IV have been found in this country (see Keel1995:235, § 634). 280See also Jaeger 1982:102, § 452 (2); 146, § 1102 (g), (h). 281 For such unprovenanced scarabs see Hall 1913: Nos. 867-876. 282For such unprovenanced scarabs see Hall 1913: No. 1836; Petrie 1917: PI. 33 [18.9.68]. 283 The German term rechteckige platte (for example Hornung and Staehelin 1976:37) was translated by Keel as 'rectangular piece' (Keel 1995:89-93). 284See Keel 1995:90, § 218; 92-93, §§ 225-228. 285But Keel himself considered an enstatite seal from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1932: PI. 8:139) as belonging to his Type III (Keel 1997:218-219, No. 342). 286The existence of faience necklaces in Canaan is demonstrated, e.g., in the Fosse Temples at Lachish (Tufnell, Inge and Harding 40:74-76, PIs. 14,34-36). 287Such cones appear on a wall-painting fragment from the tomb of Neb-Amun at Thebes, dating to the reign of Amenhotep III, which is in the British Museum (Aldred 1971 :209, PI. 67). 288Cf. a pendant in the shape of the goddess Mut, found at Amarna (Petrie 1894:29, PI. 17:283 = Boyce 1995a:345, Fig. 11.3 [A4]).

REFERENCES

Albright W.E 1932. The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim I: The Pottery of the First Three Campaigns (AASOR 12). New Haven.

Aldred C. 1971. Jewels of the Pharaohs. Egyptian Jewellery of the Dynastic Period. London.

Andreu G. 1987. Les scarabees. In A. Vila. Le cimetiere kermafque d' Ukma Ouest. La prospection archeologique de la vallee du Nil en Nubie Soudanaise. Paris. Pp.225-245.

Andrews C. 1994. Amulets of Ancient Egypt. London. Arav R. and Bernett M. 1997. An Egyptian Figurine of

Pataikos at Bethsaida. IEJ 47:198-213. Baynes-Cope A.D. and Bimson M. 1987. Scarabs and Seals:

Scientific Examination. In R.D. Barnett and C. Mendleson eds. Tharros: A Catalogue of Material in the British Museum from Phoenician and Other Tombs at Tharros, Sardinia. London. Pp. 106-107.


Beck P. 1967. Problems in the Glyptic Art of Palestine. Ph.D. diss. Columbia University. Ann Arbor and London.

Beck P. and Zevulnn U. 1996. Back to Square One. BASOR 304:64-75.

Ben-Tor D. 1997. The Relations between Egypt and Palestine in the Middle Kingdom as Reflected by Contemporary Canaanite Scarabs. IEJ 47:162-189.

Ben-Tor D. 1998a. The Absolute Date of the Montet . Jar Scarabs. In L.H. Lesko ed. Ancient Egyptian and Mediterranean Studies in Memory of William A. Ward. Providence. Pp. 1-17.

Ben-Tor D. 1998b. The Relations between Egypt and Palestine during the Middle Kingdom as Reflected by Contemporary Canaanite Scarabs. In c.J. Eyre ed. Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Egyptologists, Cambridge, 3-9 September 1995 (Orientalia LovaniensiaAnalecta 82). Leuven. Pp. 149-163.

Bietak M. 1968. Vorlaufiger Bericht tiber die erste nnd zweite Kampagne der osterreichischen Ausgrabungen auf Tell Ed-Dab'a im Ostdelta Agyptens (1966, 1967). Mitieilungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 23:79-114.

Bietak M. 1981. Avaris and Piramesse: Archaeological Exploration in the Eastern Delta (Mortimer Wheeler Archaeological Lecture 1979). (From the Proceedings of the British Academy, London LXV [1979].) London.

Bietak M., Mlinar Ch. and Schwab A. 1991. Tell el-Dab'a V: Ein Friedhojsbezirk der Mittlern Bronzezeitkultur mit Totentempel und Siedlungsschicten I (Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie IX). Vienna.

Boulos T. 1906. On Excavation at Nag el-Kelebat. Annales du Service des Antiquites de l'Egypte 7:1-3.

Boyce A. 1995a. Collar and Necklace Designs at Amarna: A Preliminary Study of Faience Pendants. In B.J. Kemp ed. Amarna Reports VI (Occasional Publications of the Egypt Exploration Society 10). London. Pp. 336-371.

Boyce A. 1995b. Report on the 1987 Excavations. House P46.33: The Finds. In B.J. Kemp ed. Amarna Reports VI (Occasional Publications ofthe Egypt Exploration Society 10). London. Pp. 44-136.

Brandl B. 1982. The Tel Masos Scarab: A Suggestion for a New Method for the Interpretation of Royal Scarabs. Scripta Hierosolymitana 28:371-405.

Brandl B. 1984. A Scarab, Two Seal-Impressions and a Cowroid. In E. Stem. Excavations at Tel Mevorakh (1973-1976) II: The Bronze Age (Qedem 18). Jerusalem. Pp.60-61.

Brandl B. 1986. The Scarabs from Field VI at Gezer. In WA. Dever ed. Gezer IV: The 1969-71 Seasons in Field VI. The "Acropolis". Jerusalem. Pp. 247-257.

Brandl B. 1993a. Scarabs and Other Glyptic Finds. In 1. Finkelstein ed. Shiloh: The Archaeology of a Biblical Site (MSSMNIA 10). Tel Aviv. Pp. 203-222.

Brandl B. 1993b. Scarabs, a Scaraboid and a Scarab Impression from Area G (1968-1970). In M. Dothan and y. Porath 1993. Ashdod V: Excavations of Area G: The

Fourth-Sixth Seasons of Excavations 1968-1970 ('Atiqot 23). Jerusalem. Pp. 129-142.

Brandl B. 1995. A Scarab from Area A. In E. Stem, J. Berg, A. Gilboa, B. Guz-Zilberstein, A. Raban, R. RosenthalHeginbottom and 1. Sharon. Excavations at Dor, Final Report IB: Areas A and C: The Finds (Qedem Reports 2). Jerusalem. Pp. 473-474.

Brandl B. 1997. Tell Abu Hawam [Nos. 21-25] and Achsib [Nos. 110-128 and 129-162]. In Keel 1997. Pp. 12-15, 58-77.

Brandl B. 1999a. Two First-Millennium Cylinder Seals from Bethsaida (et-Tell). In R. Arav and R.A. Freund eds. Bethsaida: A City by the North Shore of the Sea of Galilee 2. Kirksville, Missouri. Pp. 225-244.

Brandl B. 1999b. Two Ramesside Scarabs from Jatt (Tel Gat Carmel). 'Atiqot 37: 17*-22*.

Brandmann S. 1959. An Egyptian Figurine from the Vicinity ofKh. El-Muqanna'. BIES 23/1-2:70 (Hebrew).

Brewer D.J. and Friedman R.F. 1989. Fish and Fishing in Ancient Egypt (The Natural History of Egypt 2). Warminster.

Brown R.M. 1986. The Cylinder Seals-Cave A2. In P.E. McGovern ed. The Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages of Central Trans jordan: TheBaq 'ah Valley Project, 1977-1981 (University Museum Monographs 65). Philadelphia. Pp.290-291.

Brown R.M. and McGovern P.E. 1986. Cave A2. In P.E. McGovern ed. The Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages of Central Transjordan: TheBaq' ah Valley Project, 1977-1981 (University Museum Monographs 65). Philadelphia. Pp.32-44.

Brunton G. 1930. Qau and Badari III (BSAE 50). London. Brunton G. 1937. Mostagedda and the Tasian Culture

(British Museum Expedition to Middle Egypt: First and Second Years 1928, 1929). London.

Brunton G. 1948. Matmar (British Museum Expedition to Middle Egypt, 1929-1931). London.

Brunton G. and Engelbach R. 1927. Gurob (Egyptian Research Account, Twenty-Fourth Year, 1918). London.

Buhl M.-L. 1969. The North-Western Sector 1932. In M.-L. Buhl and S. Holm-Nielsen. Shiloh: The Danish Excavations at Tall Sailiin, Palestine, in 1926,1929,1932, and 1963-The Pre-Hellenistic Remains (Publications of the National Museum Archaeological-Historical Series I Vol. XII). Copenhagen. Pp. 36-42.

Collon D. 1982. The Alalakh Cylinder Seals: A New Catalogue of the Actual Seals Excavated by Sir Leonard Woolley at Tell Atchana, and from Neighbouring Sites on the Syrian-Turkish border (BAR Int. S. 132). Oxford.

Collon D. 1987. First Impressions. London. Corbo V.C. and Loffreda S. 1985. Resti del Bronzo Medio

a Cafarnao: Relazione preliminare alIa XVIII campagna, 4 maggio-6luglio 1985. LA 35:375-390.

Dabney M.K. 1993. The Cylinder Seals. In. F.W. James and P.E. McGovern eds. The Late Bronze Egyptian Garrison at Beth Shan: A Study of Levels VII and VIIl (University Museum Monographs 85). Philadelphia. Pp. 227-234.

158 BARUCH BRANDL

Der Manuelian P. 1987. Studies in the Reign of Amenophis II (Hildesheimer Agyptologische Beitrage 26). Hildesheim.

Doumet C. 1992. Sceaux et cylindres orientaux: la collection Chiha (OBO, Series Archaeologica 9). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen.

Downes D. 1974. The Excavations at Esna 1905-1906. Warminster.

Dumortier J.-B. 1996. Les scarabees de Tell el-Far'ah. In P. Amiet, J. Briend, L. Courtois and J.-B. Dumortier. Tell el Far'ah. Histoire, glyptique et ceramologie (OBO, Series Archaeologica 14). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen. pp.35-79.

Dunham D. 1967. Uronarti, Shalfak, Mirgissa (Second Cataract Fort II). Boston.

Eisen G.A. 1940. Ancient Oriental Cylinder and Other Seals with a Description of the Collection of Mrs. William H. Moore (OIP 47). Chicago.

Elgavish J. 1977a. Chronique Archeologique: Shiqmona. RB 84:264-266.

Elgavish J. 1977b. Notes and News: Shiqmona, 1976. IEJ 27/2-3:66-167.

Elgavish J. 1994. Shiqmona: On the Seacoast of Mount Carmel. Tel Aviv (Hebrew).

EI-KhouliA. and Kanawati N. 1988. Excavations at Saqqara. North-West ofTetis Pyramid II. Sydney.

Engelbach R. 1923. Harageh (BSAE 28). London. Frankfort H. 1939. Cylinder Seals: A Documentary Essay on

the Art and Religion of the Ancient Near East. London. Firth C.M. 1912. The Archaeological Survey of Nubia.

Reportfor 1908-1909. Cairo. Gardiner A. 1973. Egyptian Grammar (3rd revised edition).

London. Garfinkel Y. 1998. Dancing and the Beginning of Art Scenes

in the Early Village Communities of the Near East and Southeast Europe. CAJ8/2:207-237.

Garfinkel Y. 2003. Dancing at the Dawn of Agriculture. Austin, Texas.

Giddy L. 1999. Kom Rabi'a: The New Kingdom and PostNew Kingdom Objects (The Survey of Memphis II). London.

Giveon R. 1969. Thutmosis IV and Asia. JNES 28:54-59. Giveon R. 1985. Egyptian Scarabs from Western Asia from

the Collections of the British Museum (OBO, Series Archaeologica 3). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen.

Giveon R. 1988. Scarabsfrom Recent Excavations in Israel (OBO 83). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen.

Giveon R. 1989. Egyptian Artifacts. In Z. Herzog, G. Rapp and O. Negbi eds. Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel (MSSMNIA 8). Minneapolis and Tel Aviv. Pp. 341-344.

Giveon R. and Kertesz T. 1986. Egyptian Scarabs and Seals from Acco. From the Collection of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums. Fribourg, Switzerland.

Gophna R. and Sussman V. 1969. A Middle Bronze Age Tomb at Barqai. 'Atiqot (HS) 5:1-13 (English summary, p. 1 *).

Griffith F.L. 1890. The Antiquities of Tell el Yahudiyeh, and Miscellaneous Work in Lower Egypt during the Years 1887-1888. London.

Griffith EL. 1923. Oxford Excavations in Nubia (Continued). AAA 10:73-171.

Guardata EB. 1986. Iconographic Contributions of Palestinian Glyptic to the Mitannian 'Common Style'. In M. Kelly-Buccellati ed. Insight through Images: Studies in Honor of Edith Porada. Malibu. pp. 15-19.

Guy P.L.O. and Engberg R.M. 1938. Megiddo Tombs (OIP 33). Chicago.

Hall H.R. 1913. Catalogue of Egyptian Scarabs, Etc., in the British Museum I: Royal Scarabs. London.

Hayes W.C. 1951. Inscriptions from the Palace of Amenhotep III. JNES 10/4:231-242.

Hayes W.C. 1953. The Scepter of Egypt: A Backgroundfor the Study of the Egyptian Antiquities in the Metropolitan Museum of Art Part I: From the Earliest Times to the End of the Middle Kingdom. New York.

Hayes W.C. 1968. The Scepter of Egypt: A Background for the Study of the Egyptian Antiquities in the Metropolitan Museum of Art Part II: The Hyksos Period and the New Kingdom (1675-1080 B.C.). New York.

Herrmann Ch. 1994. A"gyptische Amulette aus Pallistina/ Israel (OBO 138). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen.

Holbl G. 1979. Typologische Arbeit bei der Interpretation von nicht klar lesbaren Skarabaenflachseiten. Studien zur Altligyptischen Kultur 7:89-102.

Holbl G. 1986. A"gyptisches Kulturgut im phOnikischen und punischen Sardinien I, II (Etudes Pre liminaire aux Religions Orientales dans l'Empire Romain 102). Leiden.

Hom S.H. 1962. Scarabs from Shechem. JNES2111:1-14. Hom S.H. 1973. Scarabs and Scarab Impressions from

Shechem III. JNES 32/3: 281-289. Hornung E. and Staehelin E. 1976. Skarabiien und andere

Siegelamulette aus Basler Sammlungen (Agyptische Denkmaler in der Schweiz 1). Mainz.

Ions V. 1968. Egyptian Mythology. London, New York, Sydney and Toronto. (2nd edition, 3rd impression 1975).

Jaeger B. 1982. Essai de classification et datation des scarabees Menkheperre (OBO, Series Archaeologica 2). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen.

Karkowski J. 1981. Faras V: The Pharaonic Inscriptions from Faras. Warsaw.

Kayser H. 1958. Die Ganse des Amon (Eine Neuerwerbung des Pelizaeus-Museums). Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archiiologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 16: 193.

Keel O. 1980. La glyptique. In J. Briend and J.-B. Humbert. Tell Keisan (1971-1976): une cite phenicienne en Galilee (OBO, Series Archaeologica 1). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen. Pp. 257- 295.

Keel O. 1989. Zur Identifikation des Falkenkopfigen auf den Skarabaen der ausgehenden 13. und der 15. Dynastie. In O. Keel, H. Keel-Leu and S. Schroer. Studien zu den Stempelsiegeln aus PaliistinaiIsrael II (OBO 88). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen. Pp. 243-280.

Keel O. 1990. La glyptique de Tell Keisan (1971-1976). In O. Keel, M. Shuval and Ch. Uehlinger. Studien zu den Stempelsiegeln aus Pallistina/Israel III: Die Friihe Eisenzeit Ein Workshop (OBO 100). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen. Pp. 163-260,298-321.


Keel O. 1995. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette aus Paliistinallsrael: Von den Anfangen bis zur Perserzeit, Einleitung (OBO, Series Archaeologica 10). Fribourg, Switzerland and G6ttingen.

Keel O. 1997. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette aus Paliistinallsrael. Von den Anfangen bis zur Perserzeit. Katalog I: Von Tell Abu Farag bis 'Atlit. With Three Contributions by Baruch Brandl (OBO, Series Archaeologica 13). Fribourg, Switzerland and G6ttingen.

Keel O. and Munger S. 2004. Stamp Seal Amulets. In Y Peleg and 1. Eisenstadt 2004. Pp. 240-241, 255.

Kirkbride D. 1965. Scarabs. In K.M. Kenyon. Excavations at Jericho II: The Tombs Excavated in 1955-8. London. Pp. 580-655.

Kuhne H. and Salje B. 1996. Kamid el-Loz 15: Die Glyptik (Saarbrucker Beitrage zur Altertumskunde 56). Bonn.

Kunath S. 1985. Ein Siegel Ramses' II. von Tel Sokah-Nir David. BN28:27-29.

Lacovara P. 1997. Egypt and Nubia during the Second Intermediate Period. In E.D. Oren ed. The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives (University Museum Monographs 96; University Museum Symposium Series 8). Philadelphia. Pp. 69-83.

Lamon R.S. and Shipton G.M. 1939. Megiddo I: Seasons of 1925-34, Strata I-V(OIP 42). Chicago.

Leibovitch J. 1955. Description of the Scarabs Found in a Cemetery near Tel Aviv. 'Atiqot 1: 13-18.

Levy Y. 1993. Rishon Le~iyyon Sand Dunes. HA 100:49-50.

LevyY. 1995. Rishon Le~iyyon Sand Dunes. ESI 13:57-59. Loat L. 1905. Gurob (Egyptian Research Account, Tenth

Year, 1904). London. Loud G. 1948. Megiddo II: Seasons of 1935-39 (OIP 62).

Chicago. Macalister R.A. S. 1912. The Excavation of Gezer 1902-1905

and 1907-1909 I-III. London. Malamat A. 1961. Campaigns of Arnenhotep II and Thutmose

IV to Canaan. Scripta Hierosolymitana 8:218-231. Markowitz Y 1997. The Seals from Kerma. In E.D. Oren

ed. The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives (University Museum Monographs 96; University Museum Symposium Series 8). Philadelphia. Pp.83-86.

Martin G.T. 1971. Egyptian Administrative and PrivateName Seals. Principally of the Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period. Oxford.

Matouk F.S. 1971. Corpus du Scarabee Egyptien I: les scarabees royaux. Beirut.

Matthiae Scandone G. 1975. Scarabei e scaraboidi egiziani ed egittizzanti del Museo Nazionale di Cagliari (Collezione di Studi Fenici 7). Rome.

Mazar A. 1978. Cylinder-Seals of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages in Eretz-Israel. Qadmoniot 9:6-14 (Hebrew).

Mlinar Ch. 1999. Skarabaen und deren Fundzusammenhang aus Agypten und Nubien 13. bis friihe 18. Dynastie. Abbildungsband II zur Dissertation: Eine chronologische

und typologische Untersuchung der Skarabaen von TellDab 'a aus der 13.-15. Dynastie. Vienna.

Mlinar Ch. 2001. Die Skarabaen von Tell el-Dab 'a. Eine chronologische und typologische Untersuchung der Skarabaen von Tell-Dab 'a aus der 13.-15. Dynastie. Katalog. Vienna.

Murray A.S. 1900. Excavations at Enkomi, 1896. In A.S. Murray, A.H. Smith and H.B. Walters. Excavations in Cyprus. London.Pp. 1-54.

Murray M.A. 1953. Hieroglyphic and Ornamental Seals. In O. Tufnell. Lachish III (Tell ed-Duweir): The Iron Age. Oxford. Pp. 360-373.

Na'aman N. 1984. Topographical and Historical Considerations of Amenhotep II's Campaigns to Canaan. EI 17 :257-262 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 11 *).

Najjar M. 1991. A New Middle Bronze Age Tomb at the Citadel of Amman. ADAJ 35: 105-134.

Newberry P.E. 1906. Scarabs: An Introduction to the Study of Egyptian Seals and Signet Rings. London.

Newberry P.E. 1907. Scarab-Shaped Seals (Catalogue general des antiquites egyptiennes du Musee du Caire, Nos. 36001-37521). London.

Noble J.v. 1969. The Technique of Egyptian Faience. AJA 73:435--439.

Nougayrol J. 1939. Cylindres-sceaux et Empreintes de Cylindres trouVl?s en Palestine (au cours de fouilles rtiguliers) (Haut-Commissariat de la Republique Franyaise en Syrie et au Liban, Service des Antiquites, BibliotMque ArcMologique et Historique 33). Paris.

Oren E.D., Morrison M.A. and Gilead 1. 1986. Land of Gerar Expedition: Preliminary Report for the Seasons of 1982 and 1983. BASOR Supplement 24:57-87.

Oren E.D., Yekutieli Y, Nahshoni P. and Feinstein R. 1991. Tel Haror-After Six Seasons. Qadmoniot 24/1-2:2-19 (Hebrew).

Ory J. 1945. A Middle Bronze Tomb at el-Jisr. QDAP 12:31--41.

Parker B. 1949. Cylinder Seals from Palestine. Iraq 11:1--43.

PeetT.E. 1914. The Cemeteries of Abydos Part II: 1911-1912 (Egypt Exploration Fund, Memoirs 34). London.

Peleg Y and Eisenstadt 1. 2004. A Late Bronze Age Tomb at I:Iebron (Tell Rumeideh). In H. Hizmi and A. De-Groot eds. Burial Caves and Sites in Judea and Samaria: From the Bronze and Iron Ages (Judea and Samaria Publications 4). Jerusalem. Pp. 231-259.

Petrie W.M.F. 1889. Historical Scarabs. A Series of Drawings from the Principal Collections, Arranged Chronologically. London.

Petrie W.M.F. 1890. Kahun, Gurob and Hawara. London. Petrie W.M.F. 1891. Illahun, Kahun and Gurob. London. Petrie W.M.F. 1894. Tell el-Amarna. London. Petrie W.M.F. 1896. Koptos. London. Petrie W.M.F. 1902. Description of the Scarabs and Weights.

In R.A.S. Macalister. First Quarterly Report of the Excavation of Gezer. PEFQSt 34:317-375.

160 BARUCH BRANDL

Petrie W.M.F. 1917. Scarabs and Cylinders with Names. Illustrated by the Egyptian Collection in University College, London (BSAE 29). London.

Petrie WM.F. 1925. Buttons and Design Scarabs (BSAE 38). London.

Petrie WM.F. 1930. Beth Pelet I: Tell Fara (BSAE 48). London.

Petrie WM.F. 1931. Ancient Gaza I: Tell el Ajjul (BSAE 53). London.

Petrie WM.F. 1932. Ancient Gaza II: Tell el Ajjul (BSAE 54). London.

Petrie WM.F. 1933. Ancient Gaza III: Tell elAjjul (BSAE 55). London.

Petrie WM.F. 1934. Ancient Gaza IV: Tell el Ajjul (BSAE 56). London.

Petrie WM.F. and Brunton G. 1924a. Sedment I (BSAE 34). London.

Petrie WM.F. and Brunton G. 1924b. Sedment II (BSAE 35). London.

Petrie W.M.F. and Garrow Duncan J. 1906. Hyksos and Israelite Cities (BSAE 12). London.

Petrie WM.F. and Quibell J.E. 1896. Naqada and Ballas. London.

Petrie WM.F., Mackay E.J.H., Murray M.A., Flinders Petrie H., Gardner E.W and Pape C. 1952. City of Shepherd Kings and Ancient Gaza V (BSAE 64). London.

Petrie WM.F., Wainwright G.A. and Mackay E. 1912. The Labyrinth Gerzeh and Mazghuneh (BSAE 21). London.

Pier G.Ch. 1906-1907. Historical Scarab Seals from the Art Institute Collections, Chicago. American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature 23:75-94.

von Pilgrim C. 1996. Elephantine XVIII: Untersuchungen in der Stadt des Mittleren Reiches und der Zweiten Zwischenzeit. Mainz am Rhein.

Pinch G. 1993. Votive Offerings to Hathor. Oxford. Porada E. 1947. Seal Impressions ofNuzi (AASOR 24). New

Haven. Price Williams D. 1977. The Tombs of the Middle Bronze

Age II Period from the '500' Cemetery at Tell Fara (South) (University of London, Institute of Archaeology, Occasional Publication 1). London.

Pritchard J.B. 1963. The Bronze Age Cemetery at Gibeon (University Museum Monographs 25). Philadelphia.

Quirke S. 2001. The Cult of Ra. Sun-Worship in Ancient Egypt. London.

Redissi T. 1995. Etudes des scarabees et scaraboYdes de Kerkouane. Revue des Etudes Pheniciennes-Puniques et des Antiquites Libyques 9:115-146.

Redissi T. and Tillot M. 1995. Catalogue des scarabees et scaraboYdes de Kerkouane. Revue des Etudes PheniciennesPuniques et des Antiquites Libyques 9:147-188.

Regner Ch. 1995. Skarabiien und Skaraboide (Bonner Sammlung von Aegyptiaca 1). Wiesbaden.

Reisner G.A. 1923. Excavations at Kerma Parts IV-V (Harvard African Studies VI). Cambridge, Mass.

Reisner G.A. 1955. Clay Sealings of Dynasty XIII from Uronarti Fort. Kush 3:26-69.

Reisner G.A. 1958. Amulets II (Catalogue general des antiquites egyptiennes du Musee du Caire Nos. 12528-13595). Cairo.

Richards F.V 1992. Scarab Seals from a Middle to Late Bronze Age Tomb at Pella in Jordan (OBO 117). Freiburg, Switzerland and Gottingen.

Richards F. 1996. The ANRA Scarab: An Archaeological and Historical Approach. Ph.D. diss. University of Edinburgh. Edinburgh.

Richards F. 2001. The ANRA Scarab: An Archaeological and Historical Approach (BAR Int. S. 919). Oxford.

RoweA. 1936. A Catalogue of Egyptian Scarabs, Scaraboids, Seals and Amulets in the Palestine Archaeological Museum. Cairo.

RoweA. 1940. The Four Canaanite Temples of Beth-Shan I: The Temples and Cult Objects (Publication ofthe Palestine Section of the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania 2). Philadelphia.

Salje B. 1990. Der 'Common Style' der Mitanni-Glyptik und die Glyptik der Levante und Zyperns in der Spiiten Bronzezeit (Baghdader Forschungen 11). Mainz am Rhein.

Save-SOderbergh T. 1989. Middle Nubian Sites (The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia 4:1-2). Uppsala.

Schaeffer C.F.-A. 1948. Stratigraphie comparee et chronologie de l'Asie occidentale (IIIe et lIe millenaires). Oxford.

Schaeffer-Forrer C.F.-A., Amiet P., Chenet G., Mallowan M., Bittel K. and Porada E. 1983. Corpus des cylindressceaux de Ras Shamra-Ugarit et d'Enkomi-Alasia Tome I (Recherches sur les civilisations, "synthese" 13). Paris.

Schroer S. 1989. Die Gottin auf den Stempelsiegeln aus Palastinallsrael. In O. Keel, H. Keel-Leu und S. Schroer. Studien zu den Stempelsiegeln aus PaliistinalIsrael II (OBO 88). Fribourg, Switzerland and Gottingen. Pp.89-207.

Sellin E. 1904. Tell Ta 'annek (Denkscriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophischhistorische Klasse 50/4). Berlin.

Sliwa J. 1985. Egyptian Scarabs, Scaraboids and Plaques from the Cracow Collections (Studia ad Archaeologiam Mediterraneam pertinentia 8). Krakow.

Sothcby's Sale 6256: The Ada Small Moore Collection of Ancient Near Eastern Seals. New York, 12 December 1991.

Spalinger G.L. 1982. Scaraboid in the Form of a Fish. In. E. Brovarsky, S. Doll and R.E. Freed eds. Egypt s Golden Age: The Art of Living in the New Kingdom 1558-1085 B.C. (Catalogue of the Exhibition, Museum of Fine Arts Boston). Boston. Pp. 254, 309 [No. 359].

Starkey J.L. and Harding G.L. 1932. Beth-Pelet Cemetery. In E. Macdonald, J.L. Starkey and G.L. Harding. Beth-Pelet II (BSAE 52). London.

SteindorffG. 1935. Aniba 1. Hamburg. Sussman V. 1966. Middle Bronze Age Burials at Mo~a.

'Atiqot (HS) 3:40-43 (English summary, p. 5*).


Teissier B. 1984. Ancient Near Eastern Cylinder Seals from the Marcopoli Collection. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London.

Tite M.S. and Bimson M. 1989. Glazed Steatite: An Investigation of the Methods of Glazing Used in Ancient Egypt. World Archaeology 2111 :87~ 100.

Tufnell O. 1958. Hieroglyphic and Ornamental Seals. In O. Tufnell, D.F.W. Baden-Powell, D.M.A. Bate, 1 Cerny, D. Diringer, M. Giles, H. Helbaek, B.S.J. Isserlin, M.A. Murray, B. Parker, E. Porada, P.C. Thompson, I. Todd and J. Waechter. Lachish IV (Tell ed Duweir): The Bronze Age. London. Pp. 92~ 126.

Tufnell O. 1973. The Middle Bronze Age Scarab-Seals from Burials on the Mound at Megiddo. Levant 5:69~82.

Tufnell O. 1975. Seal Impressions from Kahun Town and Uronarti Fort: A Comparison. JEA 61:67~101.

Tufnell O. 1975~1976. Tomb 66 at Ruweise, near Sidon. Berytus 24:5~25.

Tufnell O. 1980. A Review of the Contents of Cave 303 at Tell el-'Ajjul. 'Atiqot 14:37--48.

Tufnell O. 1984. Studies on Scarab Seals II: Scarab Seals and Their Contribution to History in the Early Second Millennium B. C. Warminster.

Tufnell 0., Inge Ch.H. and Harding L 1940. Lachish II (Tell ed Duweir): The Fosse Temple. London.

Uehlinger Ch. 1990. Die Sammlung agyptischer Siegelamulette (Skarabaensammlung Fouad S. Matouk). In O. Keel, Ch. Uehlinger, M. Gasser, Ch. Herrmann, H. Keel-Leu and C. Muller-Winkler. Altorientalische Miniaturkunst. Die iiltesten visuellen Massenkommunikationsmittel. Ein Blick in die Sammlungen des Biblischen Instituts der Universitiit Freiburg Schweiz. Mainz. Pp. 58~86.

Vercoutter J., Elhat H., Hesse A., Karlin C., Maley J. and Vila A. 1970. Mirgissa I. Paris.

Ward W.A. 1966. Scarabs, Seals and Cylinders from Two Tombs atAmman.ADAJ11:5~18.

Ward W.A. 1978. Studies on Scarab Seals I: Pre 12th Dynasty Scarab Amulets. Warminster.

Ward W.A. and Dever W.G. 1994. Studies on Scarab Seals III: Scarab Typology and Archaeological Context. An Essay on Middle Bronze Age Chronology. San Antonio, Texas.

Weinstein 1M. 1981. The Egyptian Empire in Palestine: A Reassessment. BASOR 241:1~28.

Weinstein J.M. 1986. The Scarabs and a Ring with a Cryptogram. In. P.E. McGovern ed. The Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages of Central Transjordan: The Baq 'ah Valley Project, 1977~1981 (University Museum Monographs 65). Philadelphia. Pp. 284~289.

Wright G.E. 1957. The Second Campaign at Tell Balatah (Shechem). BASOR 148:11~28.

Yadin Y., Aharoni Y., Amiran R., Dothan T., Dunayevsky I. and Perrot J. 1958. Hazor I: An Account of the First Season of Excavations, 1955. Jerusalem.

Yedaya M. 1969. A Statuette of "Ptah the Dwarf' in the Museum of Hanita. Hanita. Pp. 33--40 (Hebrew).

Yeivin Sh. 1967. Amenophis II's Asianic Campaigns. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 6: 119~128.

Yogev O. 1985. A Middle Bronze Age Cemetery South of Tel Rehov. 'Atiqot 17:90~ 113.

Zori N. 1977. Nakhalath Issachar (The Land of 1ssachar Archaeological Survey). Jerusalem (Hebrew).

162 BA RUCH BRANDL

o 0.5 L-J

Fig. 3.1. Tomb 24. Scarab No. J.

o 0.5 L--J

Fig. 3.2. Tomb 24. Scarab No.2.

CHAPTER 3: SCARABS, SEA LS, AN AMU LET AN D A PEN DANT 163

o 0.5 L-----l

Fig. 3.3. Tomb 24. Sccwab No.3.

o 0.5 L-----l


164 BARUCH BRA DL

o 0.5 ~

Fig. 3.5. Tomb 33. Scarab No.5,

o 0.5 L-J


CHAPTER 3: SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMULET AND A PENDA NT

o 0.5 L-.J


o 0.5 '------.J


165

166 BARUCH BRAN DL

~ ~

~. '-. g.,.-... @-.-~. . ." - ~ - J • . .,.

': ~, - -- -. ~. , . .

o 0.5 L---.J

Fig. 3.9. Tomb 33. Sea! NO. 9.

CHAPTER 3: SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMULET AND A PE DA T 167

o

o 0.5 L---.J

Fig. 3.10. Tomb 100. Plaque No. 10. Left: 'Face A '; right: 'Face B '.

168 BA RUCH BRANDL

,

~cj' }JV ,r:;C: · ~6 ''\: .

. ' .J.' ,{ 1:0::

@., o -.. A. _: -

. .

o 0.5 ~

Fig. 3.11 . Tomb 100. Seal No . II.

CHAPTER 3: SCA RABS, SEA LS, AN AMULET AN D A PE NDANT 169

o 0.5 ~

Fig. 3.12. Tomb 100. Plaque No . 12.

170

o 0.5 ~

BARUCH BRANDL

Fig. 3.13. Tomb 100. Scaraboid No. 13.

o

C __ J

Fig. 3.14. Tomb 100. PlaqlleNo. 14.

o 0.5 ~

CHAPTER 3; SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMULET AND A PENDANT 171

o 0.5 L--.J

Fig. 3. J 5. Tomb 500. Scarab No. 15.

o 0.5 L--.J

Fig. 3.16. Tomb 500. Scarab No. 16.

172 BARUCH BRANDL

o O.S L-J

Fig. 3. 17. Tomb 510. Scarab No. /7.

o 0.5 L-J

Fig. 3.i8. Tomb 510. Scarab No. 18.

CHAPTER 3: SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMU LET AND A PENDANT

o 0.5 L-J

Fig. 3.19. TombS/D. Scarab No. 19.

o 0.5 L-J

Fig. 3.20. Tomb5/D. Scarab No. 20.

173

174 BARUC H BRANDL

o 0.5 L-J

Fig. 3.21 . Tomb 510. Scarab No. 21.

o 0.5 L-J


CHA PTER 3: SCARA BS, SEALS, AN AMULET AN D A PENDANT

o 0.5 ~

Fig. 3.23. Tomb 510. Scarab No . 23.

•

, 4 "~,,j ;;l~

~. ~ • >,.'

,, " ', - ,c" , , ~' 0 =

o 0.5 ~


175

176 BA RUCH BRANDL

o 0.5 L-..J


I ~"' '' O ' ~

o 0.5 L-..J

~. ~


CHAPTER 3: SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMULET A D A PENDA T

,'~ 1_--a 0.5 L-J


o 0.5 L-J


177

178

I"" r ,

, . ~ • - I

~ \ • I

BARUCH BRANDL

o 0,5 L-J

Fig. 3.29. Tomb5lD. Scarab No. 29.

o 0.5 L-.J


CHAPTER 3: SCARABS, SEA LS, AN AMULET AND A PENDANT

o 0.5

L---.J


•

' " ,<C'' ' --.... ~ .. " . "

- .. " , '

o 0.5 ~


179

180 BARUCH BRANDL

o 0.5 L-.J


o 0.5 L-J

Fig. 3.34. Tomb 5/0. Scaraboid No. 34.

CHAPTER 3: SCARA BS, SEALS, AN AMULET AND A PENDANT

~.

-~~ .' r.~ - , - _'

o 0.5 ~

Fig. 3.35. Tomb 5/0. Scarab No . 35.

~. -,

,~ - - .-,~ ,

~ I" ~-

o 0.5 ~


18 1

182

.' ~;

BA RUCH BRANDL

Fig. 3.37. Tomb 5 10. Amulet No. 37.

o 0.5 ~

)

, , I ) , , ,

o 0.5 L-J

Fig. 3.38. Tomb 1. Plaque No. 38. Left: 'Face A '; righl: 'Face B ',

CHA PTER 3: SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMULET AN D A PEN DANT

o 0.5 L-.J

Fig. 3.39. Tomb I. Scarab No. 39.

o 0.5 L-.J

Fig. 3.40. Tomb I. Plaqlle No. 40. Left: Face A '; right: 'Face B '.

183

184 BARUCH BRANDL

o 0.5 L-.J

Fig. 3.41. Tomb I. Scarab No. 4 1.

o 0.5 L-J


CHAPTER 3: SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMU LET AND A PENDA NT

o 0.5 L-.J


o 0.5 L-J


185

186

o 0.5 L-J

BARUCH BRANDL

o 0.5 L-J


Fig. 3.46. Tomb 2. Seal No. 46.

CHAPTER 3: SCA RABS, SEALS, AN AMULET AN D A PEN DANT

~ ~

o 0.5 L-.J


o 0.5 L-.J

~ ~


187

188 BARUCH BRANDL

[ "' J

Fig. 3.49. Tomb 803. Plaque No. 49. Left: 'Face A '; right: 'Face B ',

o 0.5 L-J

Fig. 3.50. Tomb 803. Pendant No. 50.

fAA Reports, No. 23

BRONZE AND IRON AGE TOMBS

AT TELL BElT MIRSIM

SARA BEN-ARIEH

With contributions by

David Alon, Dan Bahat, Baruch Brandl, Eliot Braun, Leonor Dujovny, Amir Golani and Patricia Smith

ISRAEL ANTIQUITIES AUTHORITY JERUSALEM 2004

IAA Reports Publications of the Israel Antiquities Authority

Editor-in-Chief Zvi Gal

Series Editor: Ann Roshwalb Hurowitz

Volume Editor: Ayelet Gilboa

Front Cover: Tell Beit Mirsim, a view from the south. In foreground is one of the main burial grounds, southwest of the mound (photographer: Eliot Braun). Back Cover: Iron II bowl from Tomb 101 (right; see Fig. 2.46:20; photographer: Clara Amit); MB II decorated juglet from Tomb 510 (left; Fig. 2.61 :29; photographer: Clara Amit); general view of LB II Tomb 100 (bottom).

Typesetting, Layout and Production: Ann Abuhav, Margalit Hayosh Graphics: Natalia Zak Printed at Keterpress Enterprises, Jerusalem

Copyright © 2004, The Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem POB 586, Jerusalem, 91004 ISBN 965-406-173-2

CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1: THE TOMBS

CHAPTER 2: GRAVE GOODS AND CHRONOLOGY

David Alon and Sara Ben-Arieh

Sara Ben-Arieh, David Alon, Dan Bahat and Eliot Braun

Sara Ben-Arieh

CHAPTER 3: SCARABS, SEALS, AN AMULET Baruch Brandl AND A PENDANT

CHAPTER 4: JEWELRY Amir Golani

CHAPTER 5: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE II Patricia Smith and Leonor Dujovny HUMAN REMAINS FROM TOMBS 7, 24 AND 33

CHAPTER 6: THE TOMBS IN RELATION TO Sara Ben-Arieh THE OCCUPATION ON THE MOUND

REFERENCES

VI

VII

3

11

123

189

203

207

211

VI

AAA

AASOR

ABSA

ADAJ

AJA

'Atiqot (ES)

'Atiqot (HS)

BA

BAR Int. S.

BASOR

BIES

BN

BSAE

CAJ

EI

ESI

HA

IEJ

JEA

JNES

JPOS

LA

MSSMNIA

NEAEHL

OBO

OIP

OJA

PEFQST

QDAP

RB

SIMA

ZDPV

ABBREVIATIONS

Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, Liverpool

Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research

Annual of the British School at Athens

Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan

American Journal of Archaeology

English Series

Hebrew Series

Biblical Archaeologist

British Archaeological Reports International Series

Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

Bulletin of the Israel Exploration Society

Biblische Notizen

Publications of the Egyptian Research Account and British School of Archaeology in Egypt

Cambridge Archaeological Journal

Eretz-Israel

Excavations and Surveys in Israel

lfadashot Arkheologiyot (Hebrew)

Israel Exploration Journal

Journal of Egyptian Archaeology

Journal of Near Eastern Studies

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society

Liber Annuus

Monograph Series of the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.

New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Jerusalem 1993

Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis

Oriental Institute Publications

Oxford Journal of Archaeology

Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement

Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine

Revue Biblique

Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology

Zeitschrijt des Deutschen Paliistina-Vereins

Scarabs, Seals, an Amulet and a Pendant

Documents

Transcript of Scarabs, Seals, an Amulet and a Pendant