The Decorated Stone from the Synagogue at Migdal, A Holistic Interpratation and a Glimpse into the...

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2013 DOI: 10.1163/15685365-12341433

Novum Testamentum 55 (2013) 205-220 brill.com/nt

The Decorated Stone from the Synagogue at Migdal

A Holistic Interpretation and a Glimpse into the Life of Galilean Jews at the Time of Jesus

Mordechai AviamKfar Vradim

AbstractIn the center of the first century CE synagogue which was discovered at ancient Magdala (Migdal), a large decorated stone block was found. It is covered with decorative-symbolic elements on four sides and on the upper face as well, standing on four short legs. As the façade is carrying the Temple’s Menorah, this article will suggest that all other elements are not decorative but rather symbolic and symbolizing the Temple in Jerusalem. Another con-clusion is that the block was used as a base for the Torah reading table in the synagogue. These symbols show that there was a very strong connection between Galileans and Jerusa-lem with the Temple in its center, and that there is an important reflection and relations between Jewish symbolism and Jewish heavenly mysticism as it appears in ancient Jewish sources, both Biblical and non-Biblical.

Keywords Synagogue; Torah-reading; Menorah; Second Temple; Showbread Table; heavenly chariot; Enoch; Magdala; Galilee

In 2009 an important discovery was made at the ancient site of Migdal. In a salvage excavation by the IAA, a first-century synagogue was unearthed, and within it, on the floor, a large decorated stone-block was discovered, which is the focus of this article.

Migdal is a well known site of historical significance in Galilee. It appears for the first time on the pages of history in the writing of Josephus in con-nection with the struggles between Romans and Parthians in 63 BCE on the Land of Israel. According to Josephus, Cassius attacked Tarichaea (the Greek name of Migdal/Magdala) and captured 30,000 Jews (Wars 1.180).

206 M. Aviam / Novum Testamentum 55 (2013) 205-220

Although it is undoubtedly an exaggerated number, it probably reflects a large size Jewish town of the Hasmonaean Galilee. The town later took an important role during the violent days of the Roman campaign in the Gali-lee in 67 CE. Although the town is not mentioned by name in the New Tes-tament it is a common approach that it is the home town of Maria.

During the last ten years, large-scale excavations took place in two parts of the ancient site. In the center, as part of the Franciscan monastery pri-vate land, S. de Luca and A. Lena continued the excavations of former Fran-ciscan archaeologists and clarified the stratigraphy and the structures which were previously uncovered. They also enlarged the excavated area and uncovered a residential area to the west. In the heart of their property, they uncovered and cleared the large square and identified the buildings to its north as a Late Hellenistic (Hasmonaean) period bath-house, overlaid by a Roman period hot-bath. Another important discovery was the port of the city with a massive, fortified stone-pier with mooring-stones. The first structure is dated to the Hasmonaean period, and the second to the Early Roman period.

In the Northern section of the site a team of the IAA excavators lead by D. Avshalom-Gorni and A. Najar, joined by a Mexican team lead by M. Zap-ata, uncovered the synagogue as well as large residential area. The entire city-plan looks well planned with a Hypodamic, ortagonalic system of streets.

All these point to the establishment of a large, central Jewish town in the late second century BCE or the beginning of the first. I suggest that it was established by the Hasmonaean Kings as a royal, Eastern Galilean port cap-ital as part of the royal investments in the newly annexed areas of the north to the Judean young state.

When the synagogue was built at the beginning of the first century CE, it was already a large, well established Jewish town with population which was probably a mixture of immigrated Judean families and locally born new families. The synagogue, its decoration, and especially the unique dec-orated stone reflect a life of prosperity and intellectual life.1

The synagogue is a square building with a bench around its walls and another around the pillars in the center. It has a footpath, part of which is

1) M. Aviam, “What Does Archaeology Contribute to the Provenience of Enoch? A Crucial Update,” in Parables of Enoch, Early Judaism, Jesus, and Christian Origins (ed. J.H. Charles-worth and D. Bock; London: T & T Clark International, forthcoming).

The Decorated Stone from the Synagogue at Migdal 207

paved with a mosaic, decorated with a rosette and both walls and pillars were covered with frescoes of the second Pompeian style.2 The central floor is made of pebbles. If this was the original floor, it was probably covered with rugs or mats, but it is plausible that the entire floor was covered with mosaic, and it was during construction or renovation when the building was abandoned and this is the reason for such floor bedding. To the west there is another room with benches that could have been used as a smaller study room, similar to the one at Gamla.

The earliest synagogues which were dated up until today are the first phase of the synagogue at Modiin;3 it is dated to the Hasmonaean period, and the suggested building at the Royal Hasmonaean palace in Jericho.4

Although there are not yet any remains of Hasmonaean period syna-gogues in Jerusalem, I do believe that the phenomenon of building syna-gogues as public spaces for “reading and studying the Torah” started in Jerusalem and maybe even near the Temple, as suggested in the Theodotus inscription and the Toseftah, which hints at a synagogue within the Temple courtyards (Sukkah 4:5). The concept of a building which is built for com-munal gathering for reading the Torah, spread fast with the Hasmonaean expansion and arrived in the Galilee and Golan.

The Decorated Stone from Migdal

The strong connection of the Galileans to the Temple and the Menorah as its central symbol is proven now by the symbolic decorated stone discov-ered on the floor of the first-century synagogue at Migdal.

The proof that the Menorah was a central symbol for the Temple already in the first century BCE came from the coin of Mattathias Antigonus which

2) The description of the building and its design, as well as the discussion of the decorated stone is from the web site of the IAA, lectures given by the excavator D. Avshalom-Gorni, as well as many web sites such as http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kpAZYHkfc6A/TVaNkj9R8QI/AAAAAAAABOo/sCT2EI3HYtI/s1600/38.jpg; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VX83jUde KSE; http://www.lomdim.org.il/photos?album=Migdal; http://www.bib-arch.org/bar/article .asp?PubID=BSBA&Volume=37&Issue=4&ArticleID=7. 3) A. Onn, and S. Weksler-Bdolah, “Khirbet Um el-Umdan—a Jewish Village with a Syn-agogue from the Second Temple Period at Modiin,” Qadmoniot 130 (2005) 107-116 (Hebrew). 4) E. Netzer, Y. Kalman and R. Loris, “A Hasmonean Period Synagogue at Jericho,” Qadmo-niot 117 (1999) 17-24 (Hebrew).


was minted probably in 63-64 BCE during Pompey’s campaign.5 The reverse of this coin carries a depiction of the Showbread Table which was located near the Menorah. These two objects also appear on Titus’ arch as they car-ried by Roman soldiers in the triumphal march of Vespasian and Titus, and on chunk of wall-plaster from the Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem.6

The appearance of the Menorah in a synagogue dated to the Second Temple period is an uniqum, up until now. It proves, in my opinion, that the synagogue is a link to the Temple, especially for the Jewish settlements in the far periphery of the Land of Israel with Jerusalem in its center. This phenomenon was strengthened after the destruction of the Temple when the synagogues became “temporary replacements” for the Temple until the third one will be built.

As there is almost no doubt that the Menorah symbolized the Temple for Jews in the Land of Israel as well as in the Diaspora, I suggest that all other “decorative” objects which appear on the stone, and will be discussed below, are symbolic as well, and I will try to show the meaning of each one of them and the entire holistic concept.

As a first step I will give the description of the stone accompanied by line-drawing of each side, and their interpretation as suggested by the excavator.7

This is a rectangular, 0.6 m. long, circa 0.5 m. wide and 0.4 m. high, lime-stone block which stands on four short massive legs, of which the front ones are shorter than the back ones.

Front side: The façade of the stone, if it was discovered in its original place, is facing to the south, probably taking the direction of Jerusalem. The depiction here includes the seven-branched candelabrum (Menorah), standing on a square object, suggested by the excavators as a podium, flanked by two amphorae, all placed between two pillars with bases and capitals, and under an arch.

5) Y. Meshorer, Ancient Jewish Coinage (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1989) 87-98.6) L. Habas, “An Incised Depiction of the Temple Menorah and Other Cult Objects of the Second Temple Period,” in Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Vol. 2 (ed. H. Geva; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2003) 329-342.7) The photos of all sides of the stone appeared in many web sites on the Internet. A copy of the stone was displayed in the Notre Dame in Jerusalem and at the site of Migdal, and it was discussed by the excavator D. Avshalom-Gorni in public lectures. The drawings are based on the published photos and the replicas, and drawn by D. Shalem.


Figure 1. The façade of the stone

The two long sides are identical to each other: An arcade of four arches and within three of them a depiction of what the excavator suggested to be a sheaf of corn. In the fourth one, at the beginning of each row is a hanging object, suggested by the excavator to be an oil lamp.

Back side: The back side is also designed as architectural frame, but not with two pillars like the front and a slightly different arcade from the sides. There are three pillars of which the central capital is slightly different. At the top of each arch there are two objects which were identified by the excavator as rosettes. Below each of these are six triangles arranged in half of a circle, and they were not explained by the excavator.

Above the arcade, on both corners there are two geometric designs in frame, and a rectangular object in the center.

The upper face: the entire rectangular face of the stone is covered with low relief objects, decorative according to the excavator, filling the entire space as horror vacui. Almost in the center there is a large rosette, made of six petals and surrounded by six other, identical petals. On both sides of the rosette are long objects; they were identified by the excavator as palm trees. The rest of the space is taken by twelve other motifs, both floral and geometric.


Figure 3. The back of the stone

Figure 2. The sides of the stone


A New Holistic Interpretation of the Symbols

As the known symbol is the Menorah, an object from the Jerusalem Temple, symbolizing the Temple, I believe that all other object are connected to the temple and represent it in a symbolic and allegoric presentation.

The front side gives a view into the inner hall of the Temple in Jerusalem, the sanctuary (Hechal), where the Menorah, the Gold Altar, and the Show-bread Table stood. I believe that the square object which looks like a

Figure 4. The face of the stone


podium for the Menorah, represents, as a matter of fact, the Inner Altar (the Gold Altar) itself which stands in front of the Menorah, and not below it. A similar description and arrangement of the objects in the Hechal was found engraved on a plaster chunk of a large mansion in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem, dated to the first half of the first century CE.8 There, the plas-ter face of the wall left enough space to put the elements side by side, while here, on the stone, there was no other way but to depict it one behind the other. It is also possible that the altar is depicted from above while the other objects are depicted from the side, and the four horns are visible. The two amphorae on both sides of the Menorah represent the symbolic and mystic “Bnei HaYizhar” (“Olive trees,” in the English translation, but it is בני היצהר in Hebrew.) which is mentioned in Zech 4:10-14, amphorae which contains olive oil, probably for the Menorah. Amphorae on both sides of the meno-rah also appear on ancient Jewish glass from Rome, dated to the Late Roman period.9 All these elements appear under an arch and between the pillars which symbolize the architectonic façade of the Temple or the Hechal, while looking into it.

Inside each of the arches of the stone’s side arcades there is not a sheaf of corn but rather another row of arches. There is a complete similarity between the design of the front arcade’s pilasters and the depiction inside the arch which I understand as an arcade behind an arcade, or in other words, a building within a building. In my interpretation, it is a symbolic representation of the Holy of Holies inside the temple building. Although it is not very common in lapidary art, 3D structures appear very frequently in frescoes of the first century BCE and CE, such as in Italy and even in the Land of Israel as reflected by the wall painting in the small room at the back of the small Herodian theater at Herodium.10

The hanging object inside the first arch is not an oil lamp as was sug-gested. Although it has the general design of an oil lamp, I do not think it is. First of all, it does not have the complete shape of an oil lamp as it misses the “mouth,” the hole at the end of the nozzle. Second, it has a small handle on each side, and third, it is hanging from its long side. And as all other ele-ments on this stone are symbolic, I suggest it is an incense vessel, a censer These were in use in the Temple: “And the dish was .(in Hebrew בזיך or בזך)

8) Habas, “An Incised Depiction.” 9) http://www.lootedart.com/news.php?r=N4L90B393991.10) E. Netzer, Y. Kalman, R. Porat, and R. Chachi-Laureys, “Herod’s Tomb and a Royal Thea-ter on the Slopes of Herodion,” Qadmoniot 138 (2009) 104-117 (Hebrew).


in it, full and heaped up with incense. And it had a cover. And there was a kind of covering on it (in the Hebrew מטטלת, which could also mean a hanging cover)” (Tamid 5:4). Two of these were in use on the Showbread Table,11 and two are depicted on the stone.

The two circular objects in the upper part of the arches on the back side of the stone are wheels with six spokes, not rosettes. Not only are rosettes usually designed as leafs and not as lines, but there is also a difference between the centers of each of the objects. On the left one, there is a pro-truding knob and on the right one it is a sunken one. I suggest that the artist depicted here two chariot wheels; the first is viewed from its outside and the hub is visible, and the other is seen from its inside and the socket is for the shaft of the chariot. The elements above the wheels probably repre-sent the chariot itself. The set of small triangles at the bottom are schematic flames of fire. This is a well known representation of the divine chariot: “I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire” (Dan 7:9); or: “and I saw therein a lofty throne: its appearance was as crys-tal, and the wheels thereof as the shining sun . . . And from underneath the throne came streams of flaming fire” (1 En. 114:18). The vision of the divine chariot appears in few mystical books of the bible and apocrypha such as Daniel, Ezekiel, Zachariah, and 1 Enoch. In 1 Enoch we can also find the first and earliest clear appearance of a group of angels named “Ofanim” which in Hebrew are wheels.

If my interpretation is correct, then what we see depicted on the back side of the Migdal stone is a mystical, allegorical view directly into the Holy of Holies, through its architectural frame into the place of the Divine Spirit, represented by its chariot. This is probably the only artistic way to repre-sent the Holy of Holies and the Divine Spirit in the Jerusalem Temple.

It is important to note that in the early Jewish art there is a somewhat similar depiction of God seated on a winged, wheeled throne, on a YHD coin from the fifth century BCE.12

On the face of the stone, the central and largest object is the rosette. Although rosettes are the most common piece of art in Jewish art work, the

11) See also the discussion about the Showbread Table depicted on the mosaic floor of the synagogue at Sepphoris: Z. Weiss, The Sepphoris Synagogue (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2005) 95.12) Meshore, Ancient Jewish Coinage, 21-25.


design of this one is unusual among the hundreds of rosettes we know from the Second Temple period, especially on Judean ossuaries.13 The outer cir-cle which is made of six petals is completely rounded, while in almost all other examples from the architectural and funerary world these petals cre-ate straight lines between the tips of the rosette’s petals. Modern scholars such as Rahmani,14 followed recently by Hachlili,15 rejected the idea that the rosette is a symbol, and Hachlili even suggested that there is no symbol-ism yet in the world of Second Temple period Jewish art.16 As I am trying to prove that all objects on this stone are symbolic, I am supportive of the opposite conclusion. I believe that the rosette, especially this one with its twelve petals, and probably most of the rest, are symbolic as well. The loca-tion of this rosette (almost in the middle of the face of the stone), its size and design show that it has a focal meaning. I suggest that it has a celestial symbolism. The complete circle of twelve petals can symbolize the heav-ens, the sky including the time frame of twelve months, an element which will later be replaced by twelve symbols of the zodiac. The number twelve has a special importance in Jewish traditions and its connection directly to the number of loaves on the Showbread Table and the cosmos is certainly clear through the only place where the number of loaves is explained by Flavius Josephus: “. . . the loaves on the table, twelve in number, the circle of the zodiac and the year . . .” (War 5.217).

The two objects on the sides of the rosette are not palm trees. They are not designed as palm trees and a simple comparison to other known exam-ples of palm trees from the same period will prove this point.17 I think that what we have here are two sacred tools which were used during the sacred work of sacrifice and these are the raks (Magrefot מגרפה). These tools (there is also another musical tool with the same name used in the Temple) were used to rake the ash and burnt bones from the main altar (Tamid 2:1). A deeper look at the the drawings will show that the “trunk” of the “palm tree” is designed as a handle which is wrapped with a string to hold together a bunch of limbs which creates at the end of the tool the shape of a rake.

13) See e.g. L.Y. Rahmani, A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1994) 39-41.14) Ibid., 39-41.15) R. Hachlili, Ancient Mosaic Pavements, Themes, Issues and Trends (Leiden: Brill, 2009).16) Ibid., 13-14.17) For example the trees on the lintel from Gamla: D. Syon and Z. Yavor, Gamla II (Jerusa-lem, IAA Reports 44, 2010) 168-169.


This is the first appearance of another sacred vessel from the Temple, out of the Menorah, in Jewish art of the first century, and it will be replaced later on by the shovels on mosaic floors and stone in Late Roman and Byzantine period synagogues.

There are also twelve objects on the surface of the stone, designed as floral and geometric patterns and they are arranged in couples. Each cou-ple is designed differently and with no other parallels whatsoever to first-century Jewish artistic objects (ossuaries for example). There are small, medium and large couples of ivy leafs, a couple of rhombuses within a square frame, a couple of rhombuses within a square frame and a cross in the center, and a couple of unfamiliar objects which look like a folded object. In all the artistic work of the first century, including the rich mate-rial from the funerary world of ossuaries, we have no parallels to such a concentration and unusual grouping of artistic elements. My suggestion is that this group represents in a very symbolic way the twelve loaves which were placed on the Showbread Table.

The information about the shape of the loaves is varied and probably contains many different traditions, and so is the case about the way they were arranged on the Table. The most common approach is two piles of six loaves in each.

On the reverse of the coin of Mattathias Antigonus is a depiction of the Table with two piles of six concave objects.18 The Talmudic sources speak about two types of loaves, one which is an “open, broken box” (תיבה פרוצה) which probably had some kind of a square design, and the second is “rock-ing boat” (רוקדת which probably had more of a triangular shape (ספינה (pointed at the bottom and large shoulders on top). There is no consensus today regarding the shape and the way the loaves were folded. On the mosaic floor of the Samaritan synagogue at el-Khirbe there is a depiction of the Showbread Table; it is a round one and only four of the twelve loaves are now preserved. Three of them are round but each one is carrying a dif-ferent pattern of what could be a stamp or the remains of folding. The fourth is elliptic and looks like it is folded.19

18) See the extensive and detailed discussion on the depictions on these coins in Z. Amar, Five Types of Grain: Historical, Halachic, and Conceptual Aspects (Har Bracha Institute, 2010) 129-168 (Hebrew). 19) See discussion in Weiss, The Sepphoris Synagogue, 97-98.


According to Josephus, the loaves were baked in groups of two and then they were placed on the Table in two groups of six (Ant. 3.255). In the Kabala are remains of traditions that the loaves were divided into six groups of two.

In summation, my suggestion is that the collection of the twelve objects on the face of the stone represents, symbolically, the Showbread Table in the Temple.

The Function of the Stone

A careful look at the corners of the stone’s face shows that there are remains of four broken, round elements. I believe that these are the remains of four stone legs or four stone bases for wooden legs, on which a table (stone or wood) was placed and it is the table on which the Torah was read.

If this reconstruction is correct, not only do we have the first evidence for a “reading Torah table,” but also we have a strong and informative con-nection between the synagogue, the Torah within it, and the Jerusalem Temple. Here in the Migdal synagogue, the base for the Torah reading table is the Showbread Table in the Temple and the Temple itself described in pure symbolism and allegory. When the Torah was read, it was in a direct connection to the holiness of the Temple.

It is extremely important to perceive that this Migdal stone with its dec-orations is the first and only collection of symbols of the Temple to show the importance of the Temple to the people who frequented the synagogue. Moreover, it also heralds the massive use of the Temple’s symbols in third- to sixth-century CE synagogue decorations, whether on stone or mosaic floors. The most prevalent Temple symbol is the Menorah, as it appears on the stone from Migdal. The second is the façade of a building which repre-sents the architecture of the Temple in the shape of the Torah Shrine which stood in the synagogue.

There is more. On the stone from Migdal is a representation of the magr-effot (racks) which are sacred objects from the sacrifice work in the Temple. This symbol was later replaced by the shovels which were used to carry the embers from the altar as well as the ash. Both of these symbols were con-nected to the holy work on the altar. Another symbol is the Showbread Table which appears in some synagogues’ decoration as is the case in Dura Europos and Sepphoris.20 I think that an interesting example to show the

20) Ibid., 95-101.


Figure 5. The suggested reconstruction of the Torah Reading Table with the stone as its base


Figure 6. The decorated stone from the synagogue at Capernaum (curtsey of archaeologist S. De Luca)

continuity of the symbols from the Migdal stone is the decorated stone fragment from the synagogue at Capernaum. On this stone there is a build-ing shown on 3/4 view, it is surrounded by pillars or pilasters; it has wooden doors on the façade, and a gabled roof with roof tiles.

The entire building is carried on four wheels and it was usually explained during the sixties and seventies as the “portable Torah Shrine” representa-tion, in a time when no structures of Torah shrines were identified in what was then called “Early Galilean Synagogues.” When the new discoveries were made during the 1980s and 1990s, and it was clear that there are per-manent “bemas” for the Torah Shrines in almost every excavated Late Roman and Byzantine period synagogue, it was suggested that this repre-sentation from Capernaum is, as a matter of fact, the representation of the Ark of Covenant making its way back from captivity with the Philistines (Sam 6:10-17), similar to the description in Dura Europos. I always won-dered why in front of the “building on wheels” there is no evidence for cows or any yoke. I think now that this stone also represents the combination of the Temple and the divine chariot, similar although different, to the back side of Migdal’s stone.


Although my attempt to explain the complex of artistic pieces on the Migdal stone as ancient Jewish mysticism and symbolism is new, the antiq-uity of Jewish mysticism in literature is well known. There are at least three biblical compositions in which heavenly mysticism is deeply involved: Eze-kiel, Zachariah, and Daniel. I think that the closest imagery to the descrip-tion on the Migdal stone is either the book of Daniel or the exegetical expansion of Daniel found in the Parables of Enoch.

In the book of Daniel, the author mentions three times that a prayer is said in the direction of Jerusalem. It is commonly accepted by scholars that the synagogue in the first century was not a place for communal pray, but if private prayers were said towards Jerusalem and the stone was faced towards Jerusalem, we have here archaeological evidence for the impor-tance of the holy city and its Temple in the hearts of ancient Galilean Jews.

It is also very important to emphasize the significance of another book, this time from the Pseudepigrapha, the Books of Enoch. The final editing of the book, especially the final editing of the Parables of Enoch, is dated to the late days of the Hasmonaeans or the Herodian Dynasty, the time of the erec-tion of the synagogue at Migdal. The Books of Enoch also contain heavenly, celestial, and mystical scenes. It is very important to note that the earliest place in which we find a group of angels by the name of “Ofanim” is in the Books of Enoch. It later appears in the Talmud. The Hebrew translation of the word “Ofanim” is “wheels,” which undoubtedly derives from the divine chariot.

The “merkava” also appears in Second Temple period non-religious works such as Philo from Alexandria. He compares the Menorah to the movement of the planets.21 Also in Josephus’ writings there are hints of a serious discussion on empirical issues; for example, when he describes the Menorah he writes: “. . . from its single base right up to the top, having been made to consist of as many portions as are assigned to the planets with the sun. It terminated in seven branches . . . recalling the number of the plan-ets . . .” (Ant. 3.146).

These descriptions and approaches are clearly reflected on the Migdal stone, whether it is the back side with the Divine Chariot or the central rosette with its twelve petals. The archaeological discoveries all over the ancient site provide us with a lot of important, unknown information about ancient Migdal. It seems as if the town was much larger than was thought

21) Y. Liebes, “The Work of the Chariot and the Work of Creation as Esoterical Teachings,” in Philo of Alexandria, Scriptural Exegesis: The Shapes of Culture and the Religious Imagination. Essays in Honor of Michael Fishbane (ed. D. Green and L. Lieber; Oxford, 2009) 90-105.


before; it had an urban plan, a large harbor, at least one synagogue with a mosaic floor (rare at this period) and frescos. The conclusions suggested here, read from the decoration on the stone, not only reflect the intellectual society but also very strong feelings towards the Temple in Jerusalem. For the people of this congregation, the Temple was a center of longing from a distance, a place to which one wants to be connected even at daily or weekly meetings for reading the Torah. As it is dated to the first half of the first century CE, it clearly reflects the spirit of Galilean Jews at the time of Jesus.

The Decorated Stone from the Synagogue at Migdal, A Holistic Interpratation and a Glimpse into the...

Documents

Transcript of The Decorated Stone from the Synagogue at Migdal, A Holistic Interpratation and a Glimpse into the...