A Loom Weight from Tel Nami with a Scarab Seal Impression

A Loom Weight from Tel Nami with a Scarab Seal Impression Author(s): Ezra Marcus and Michal Artzy Reviewed work(s): Source: Israel Exploration Journal, Vol. 45, No. 2/3 (1995), pp. 136-149 Published by: Israel Exploration Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27926383 . Accessed: 27/03/2012 10:25 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Israel Exploration Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Israel Exploration Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

A Loom Weight fromTel Nami with a Scarab Seal Impression* Ezra Marcus

Michal

Artzy

University of Haifa This paper discusses the chronological, functional and cultural significance of a loom weight with a scarab seal impression, found in 1989 at Tel Nami on the southern Carmel

coast. Excavations

remains of a Middle

carried out here since 1985 have revealed, inter alia, the IIA anchorage settlement which had contact with a

Bronze

cultures.1 variety of the contemporary Eastern Mediterranean max. This conoid ceramic weight (Reg. No. diameter: 139/1;

6.5 cm.; height: 7.5. cm.; Figs. 1, 2)2 is pierced horizontally one-third of the distance below its apex, where it is impressed by a scarab seal. The weight was discovered in Area on the south-eastern edge of the mound, within a D (supervised by E. Marcus), sandy clay layer near bedrock in Square Y-5.3 The position of the object below Locus 420, the remains of a robbed stone surface, suggests that it was discarded before the floor was laid (last phase ofMB HA habitation at the site4). Alternatively, itwas deposited when the floor was settlement at the site was resumed).

*

robbed (perhaps during the LB

IIB Age, when

The Tel Nami Land and Sea Regional Project, directed by Dr. M. Artzy, is conducted under the auspices of the Center forMaritime Studies and the Institute of Archaeology of the University of Haifa. Funding for this project was provided by the Robert Shay Foundation, Prof. D. Hillel, the Dorot Foundation and others. The object was first discussed by E. Marcus in Tel Nami, A Study of a Middle Bronze HA Period Coastal Settlement (unpublished M.A. diss., University of Haifa), Haifa, 1991. The latterwas supported by scholarships from the Yad Ben-Zvi Institute? University of Haifa's Center for the Study of Eretz Israel and its Yishuv, and the Department of Maritime Civilizations from an endowment donated by Mr. Maurice Hatter, London. The drawings in Figs. 1-3 are by Natalie Messika. The photographs in Fig. 1 were taken by David Evan. A preliminary draft of this article was read by Dr. B. Sass, whose comments

are appreciated.

IIA Tel Nami, see M. Artzy: Tel Nami, NEAEHL, pp. 1095-1098, with bibliography in extensio. 2 The object weighs 283.5 gm. Its colour: 2.5YR 6/8 light red clay; 7.5R 5/4 weak red (remains of light slip? on parts of surface); 2.5Y 5/2 grayish brown core. 3 The impressionwas firstdiscerned during potterywashing by thekeen eye ofAleydis Van 1 On MB

de Moortel.

4 The MB IIA settlement at Tel Nami ceased to exist during what is termed the 'Palace II Phase' at Tel Aphek, see P. Beck: The Middle Bronze Age Pottery from Aphek, 1972-1984, First Summary, Tel Aviv 12 (1985), pp. 181-203.

LOOM WEIGHT FROM TEL NAMI

Fig. 1.Loom weight fromTel Nami and impression.

138

EZRA MARCUS AND MICHAL ARTZY

Fig. 2. Loom weight: drawing and section.

THE SEAL IMPRESSION 1.0 cm.) depicts the two red crowns of Lower scarab seal impression (c. 1.5 Egypt in confrontation sitting on a nbw sign.5 A scroll element connects the plumes

The

of the two red crowns. Two

'ankh signs flank this combination.6

5 A. Gardiner: Egyptian Grammar (3rd ed.), Oxford, 1957, pp. 504-505, S3 and S12. 6 Gardiner (above, n. 5), p. 508, S34.

LOOM WEIGHT FROM TEL NAMI

139

Design Parallels The Tel Nami seal impression is compared to seal impressions and scarab seals from stratified and unstratified contexts (Fig. 3).7 Principal reliance is placed on the landmark studies of O. Tufnell and W.A. Ward, although studies critical of their approach were consulted as well.8 The scarab seal chronologies developed in these studies are based on the seriation of large samples of scarabs and sealings, correlating typological attributes such as size, backs, sides, heads and designs. The following

discussion of the scarab seal impression on the Tel Nami weight is limited to size and design. The fairly common 'ankh signs are not discussed here separately.9 The nbw sign in a longitudinal setting belongs to TufneU's class 3B6;10 it represents

a collar of beads and is the determinative for gold.11 This design occurs at Jericho; at Tell el-Far'ah (S); Tell el-'Ajjul; Megiddo; Gezer; Gibeon;12 at Kahun in the Faiyum; and at the Second Cataract

fort at Uronarti

inNubia.

crowns 'confronted' (i.e. facing each other), themost important element, is a fairly rare design belonging to TufneU's class 3B3c.13 Tufnell associates thismotif with Red

the reign ofAmenemhet III, because among royal scarabs it is limited to those bearing his name.14 Scarabs with this element have been found at Gezer and in tombs at

are grateful to Mr. Baruch Brandl, who is studying scarab-impressed weights independently,for brieflydiscussing with us aspects of thisweight and the seal impression and suggesting thatwe consult the sealings fromUronarti and Kahun. We employ the term 'impression' in order to avoid confusion with 'sealing', which is used to describe those impressed objects whose impression served as evidence of the sealing of a space or

7 We

container.

8 W.A. Ward: Studies on Scarab Seals, I, Warminster, 1978 (henceforth: SSS I); O. Tufnell: Studies on Scarab Seals, II, Warminster, 1984 (henceforth: SSS II). Cf. D. O'Connor: Review of Studies in Scarab Seals, Vol. 1 by W.A. Ward, Chronique d'?gypte 115-116 (1983), pp. 167-170; idem,The Chronology of Scarabs of theMiddle Kingdom and the Second IntermediatePeriod, Journal of the Society for theStudy of Egyptian Antiquities 15 (1985), pp. 1-41. 9 SSS II, p. 117. 10 SSS II, p. 120. 11 Gardiner

12 See SSS

(above,

n. 5), loc. cit.

II, p. 120;R.A.S. Macalister: The Excavation of Gezer 1902-1905, 1907-1909, London, 1912, Fig. CCVL15; J.B. Pritchard: The Bronze Age Cemetery at Gibeon, Philadelphia, 1963,Fig. 71:10. 13 SSS II, p. 119. 14 SSS II, p. 120; cf.Pl. LUI, Nos. 3078 and 3079. Finds in Israel associated with this ruler: a bulla or sealingwithAmenemhet Ill's cartouche of thisdesign class found on the surfaceof Tel Michal, seeR. Giveon: Egyptian Artifacts, inZ. Herzog et al. (eds.): Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel, Tel Aviv, 1989, p. 343, Fig. 29.1.8; another scarab impression is reported to have been found on the base of a bowl from Tel Yokne'am, see A. Ben-Tor and A. Zarzecki: Tel Yokne'am, 1984/1985 Seasons, Excavations and Surveys in Israel 6 (1988), p. 103.

140

EZRA MARCUS AND MICHAL ARTZY

Fig. 3.Map showing location of scarab seals and searings/impressionsbearing designs identical to theTel Nami scarab seal impression.

141

LOOM WEIGHT FROM TEL NAMI

Tell el-'Ajjul, Gibeon and Jericho,15 the latter two bearing the same configuration as the Tel Nami seal impression. A scarab attributed to the site of Amrit bears the same element, as do two examples from theMatouk collection.16 Numerous sealings

with this design, some of slight glyptic variation, were discovered in Egypt at the town of Kahun and at Uronarti fort.17The design is found on numerous sealings of administrative functions at Uronarti,18 including one variation on 13 box sealings inRoom 47 and 14 times inApt. 8.19 With the exception of the two royal scarabs, all red crowns confronted on scarab seals are placed on or above a nbw sign; of these, three are flanked by 'ankh signs. Of the 16 seal impression variations with red crowns confronted (including the example

11 are placed on or above the nbw, including nine instances under discussion), it is flanked by 'ankh signs. Eleven of the 22 known instances of design class 3B3c occur in the configuration found on the Tel Nami weight; all other

where

configurations are singular occurrences. This design appears, therefore, to be a denotation of some significance; its use as an administrative seal certainly suggests some affiliation or importance. The

element connecting

the red crowns on the Tel Nami

seal presents the only

. 12), Fig. CCVI:15. Tell 15 Gezer: Macalister (above, II, Pl. XII, el-'Ajjul: SSS No. 1569. Gibeon: Pritchard (above, . 12), Fig. 71:10. Jericho: J. Garstang: Jericho, City and Necropolis, Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 19 (1932), p. 48, PI. 37, No. 9; and A. Rowe: A Catalogue of Egyptian Scarabs, Scaraboids, Seals and Amulets in thePalestine Archaeological Museum, Cairo, 1936,p. 30, PI. Ill, No. 111. 16 For Amrit, see R. Giveon: Egyptian Scarabs from Western Asia from theCollections of theBritishMuseum (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis, Series Archaeologia 3), G?ttingen, 1985, pp. 15, 138-139, No. 4. For theMatouk items, see F.S. Matouk: Corpus du Scarab?e ?gyptien, II, Analyse Th?matique, Beirut, 1976,Nos. 2406 and 2411.

17 SSS

II, p.

119; O.

Tufnell:

Seal

Impressions

from Kahun

Town

and

Uronarti

Fort,

A

Comparison, JEA 61 (1975), p. 82, Fig. 5, Nos. 256-263. The examples published by Tufnell are a representative sample of this design class. Tufnell cites seven variations of thismotif at Uronarti, while the original publication shows eight, see G.A. Reisner: Clay Sealings of Dynasty XIII fromUronarti Fort, Kush 3 (1955), Fig. 10:234, 235, 253-257, 334. Tufnell provides one example fromKahun (No. 256) while Petrie originallypublished no less than seven fragmentaryexamples in Illahun, Kahun, and Gurob, London, 1891, Pl.

IX-.50-54,

70,71.

recently S.T. Smith: Administration at the Egyptian Middle Kingdom Frontier, Sealings fromUronarti and Askut, in T.G. Palaima (ed.): Aegean Seals, Sealings and Administration, Proceedings of theNEH-Dickson Conference of theProgram inAegean Scripts and Prehistory of the Department of Classics, University of Texas at Austin, January 11-13, 1989, Aegaeum 5 (1990), Liege, pp. 197-215. For the various types of sealings, see G.A. Reisner and N.F. Wheeler: The Art of Seal Carving in Egypt in the Middle Kingdom, Bulletin of theMuseum of Fine Arts, Boston 28 (1930), pp. 47-55; and Reisner (above, n. 17). 19 Tufnell (above, n. 17, 1975),No. 261 or Reisner (above, n. 17),No. 257, pp. 30 and 35. An inventoryof the seals and their locations can be found inD. Dunham (ed.): Uronarti, Shalfak,Mirgissa, Second Cataract Forts, 2, Boston, 1967.

18 Most

142

EZRA MARCUS AND MICHAL ARTZY

anomaly from this otherwise invariable design. It is perhaps related to the scroll elements or floral designs found on other design patterns.20 No example of connected red crowns could be found in the literature consulted. Ward suggested that the spiral form was used to provide individualized

seals once the use of scarabs as seals became

cutter may have wanted to personalize widespread.21 a less common design; alternatively, this anomaly could suggest the product of a In this instance the scarab

non-Egyptian workshop. Dating As noted above, the dating of the Tel Nami seal impression is based upon its design and size alone. Since we are not dealing with a portable heirloom, it is important to note the chronological limitswithin which this design and its constituent elements

in use. The nbw (gold) sign in a longitudinal setting appears on scarabs as as the First Intermediate Period.22 Of the two examples from the intramural early one is assigned to the late MB HA or MB at IIB and the other graves Megiddo, to the end of the MB IIB Age.23 The earliest examples of red crowns confronted

were

are from Kahun

and Uronarti,

although

their context alone

does not provide

a

precise date. The workman's

town at Kahun was founded by Senusert II and continued to be in use until the reign of the 13th-Dynasty ruler, Neferhotep (c. 1740-1730 B.C.E.).24 The greatest activity at the site, however, should probably be attributed to the reign II, during the building of his pyramid at el-Lahun, although the period of great land reclamation projects in the Faiyum under Amenemhet III could also be of Senusert considered.25

The evidence from the inscriptions at Uronarti

fort shows a history of occupation

20 See SSS I, pp. 53-54; SSS II, Pl. II. Note thatTufnell's No. 257 fromUronarti, which bears design class 3B3c, does have a scroll border with interlockingC-scrolls at top and bottom (above, n. 17, 1975). 21 W.A. Ward: Egypt and theEast Mediterranean World2200-1900 B. C, Studies inEgyptian Foreign Relations during theFirst Intermediate Period, Beirut, 1971,pp. 115-116. 22 SSSll, p. 120. 23 For the former,see O. Tufnell: The Middle Bronze Age Scarab-Seals fromBurials on the Mound at Megiddo, Levant 5 (1973), p. 73, Fig. 2:76. For the latter, see ibid., Fig. 2:69 and SSS II, p. 120. 24 Tufnell (above n. 17, 1975), pp. 68-69. For a recent detailed discussion of Kahun and Uronarti, see B.J. Kemp: Ancient Egypt, Anatomy of a Civilization, London, 1989, pp. 149-157, 176-179. 25 Tufnell (above, n. 17, 1975); see also W.C. Hayes: The Middle Kingdom in Egypt, InternalHistory from theRise of theHeracleopolitans to theDeath of Ammenemes III, inCambridge Ancient History, 1,2,Cambridge, 1971,p. 509. See also B.J. Kemp and R.S. Merrillees: Minoan Pottery in Second Millennium Egypt, Mainz am Rhein, 1980, pp. 57-102, who note that the absence of scarabs and seal impressions during the 'Hyksos' period suggests a decline in the importance of the town (ibid., p. 102).

LOOM WEIGHT FROM TEL NAMI

143

beginning with Senusert Ill's sixteenth year, abandonment before the end of the 13th Dynasty and reoccupation in the 18th Dynasty.26 Reisner ascribes a 13th-Dynasty date for the entire group of sealings, given that the latest letter sealings were of the first king of that dynasty. He further suggests that the sealings represent a fairly short period, given the small number of letter sealings in relation to store

sealings.27 Tufnell argues, on the basis of a stylistic analysis of certain sealings, that the collection spans nearly two centuries.28 Kemp suggests that the sealings represent leftover granary sacks or some final administrative act prior to abandonment.29 His

suggestion has been shown by Smith to be mistakenly based on the presumption that the seals were sack seals; themajority are, in fact, door seals.30 Since the sealings at Uronarti are part of a long scarab seal tradition, presumably many of the designs

may have originated earlier. The design parallels from scarab seals tend to provide later (post MB IIA) dates, whether contextually or stylistically. The scarab parallels from Jericho and Gibeon were both found inMB from lateMB

IIB tombs; typologically, the scarab from Amrit may date

IIA.31

seal is closest in length to the sealings at Kahun, where Finally, class also 3 15 mm. in length.32 Scarab length by averages approximately design serve a as cannot itself, however, chronological determination. The length tends the Tel Nami

to increase from the First

Intermediate Period onward; this trend peaks in the 13thDynasty and is reversed until the early 18thDynasty.33 To summarize, a lifespan of several centuries might be suggested for the design of the Tel Nami seal impression. The terminus post quern for the Kahun sealings is the reign of Senusert II (1897-1878), providing an upper bound for the design's

appearance. If we accept Tufnell and Ward's hypothesis regarding the relationship between royal names and design scarabs,34 the reign of Amenemhet III (1842-1797)

26 Reisner (above, . 17), p. 26; Tufnell (above, . 17, 1975), p. 69. 27 Reisner, (above, n. 17),pp. 26, 42. 28 Tufnell (above, n. 17, 1975), p. 69. Her upper bound of c. 1860 is based on a sealing of Senusert II and on the presence of red crowns confronted,which, as aforesaid, she associates with the reign ofAmenemhet III. 29 B.J. Kemp: Large Middle Kingdom Granary Buildings (and the Archaeology of Administration), Zeitschriftf?r ?gyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 113 (1986), p.

125.

30 Smith (above, . 18), pp. 206-207. In the private apartments seals may have been kept for a long time, see p. 207, n. 56. Many of the parallels to theTel Nami seal impression were

found

in such

apartments.

Pritchard (above, n. 12), pp. 31 Garstang (above n. 15), pp. 43-49, Pis. XXIX-XXXVI; 46-47, Figs. 40-41; and SSS II, p. 43, Table XXXIV; W.A. Ward: Scarab Typology and Archaeological Context, AJA 91 (1987), Fig. 1.From Amrit, see ibid. 32 Tufnell (above n. 17, 1975), p. 76, Fig. 1. 33 SSS II, p. 28. 34 See SSS II, pp. 1-2, 24;Ward (above, n. 31), pp. 508-509.

144

EZRA MARCUS AND MICHAL ARTZY

should be the terminus post quern for design class 3B3c and this impression. The scarab seals bearing this design provide a lower bound in theMB IIB period. Scarab

seals, which are often kept as heirlooms, do not in themselves indicate that a given design was in use when the seal was deposited. In contrast, the dating of sealings conclusively indicates a period of use, especially when a demonstrable administrative

design is involved. Theoretically, sealings or seal impressions could be the product of an heirloom scarab seal, but such a claim could only be considered in light of scarab seals as heirlooms, perhaps of independent criteria.35 The appearance

denoting prestige, may consequently diminish the utility of an equable chronological comparison between scarab seals and seal impressions bearing similar designs.36 IIB occupation at Tel Nami, our weight may only be Given the absence of MB

or LB IIB, both periods from which the design and impressed weights of this type are unknown. We would like to note the limited presence of ceramic evidence from the LB I period at Area G on the northern attributed to either the LB HA

although no architecture can yet be ascribed to this period. A looted LB II shaft pit (tomb?) excavated in Area D in 1992 has led us to suspect that while the Nami region seems to have been abandoned between the MB IIA side of the mound,

IIB periods, the mound may have been used for a number of burials, some perhaps from an unknown site or from nearby 'Atlit or Dor. The LB I finds (two nearly 75% complete bowls) from Area G may have originated in another looted and LB

the somewhat disturbed nature of the context in which the weight tomb. Despite no other finds which might postdate the MB IIA period were found found, in association.37 Thus, the absolute date of the scarab-impressed weight from

was

Tel Nami

should be placed after the beginning of Amenemhet Ill's reign, i.e. or of the latter half the nineteenth the the eighteenth of century during beginning century

B.C.E.

35 Note that seal impressionAlalakh 194, which is on a LB tablet, is from an heirloom cylinder seal of the MB HA period, see B. Teissier: The Seal Impression Alalakh 194,A New Aspect of Egypto-Levantine Relations in theMiddle Kingdom, Levant 22 (1990), pp. 65-73. For one explanation of the use of heirloom seals, see E. Auerbach: Heirloom Seals and Political Legitimacy inLate Bronze Age Syria,Akkadica 74-75 (1991), pp.

19-36.

36 This is perhaps a fundamental limitation in relating theKahun and Uronarti sealingswith the rest of Tufnell's study, see SSS II, p. 85. Note thatTufnell did not consider the seal impressions (including those on loom weights) fromMegiddo in her study of this site's scarabs,

see above,

n. 23.

37 As to thepossibility that theweight originated ina post-MB IIA-pre-LB IIB tomb,we note that some loomweights fromMegiddo (withand without impressions) are reported to have been found in intramural tombs. G. Loud: Megiddo II, Chicago, 1948, Pis. 169-170. We have no means of verifying their association with the pottery of these tombs. No loom weights were found in the extramural tombs, see P.L.O. Guy and R.M. Engberg: Megiddo Tombs, Chicago, 1938, or in any tombs from other published sites.

145

LOOM WEIGHT FROM TEL NAMI

THE FUNCTION OF THE WEIGHT ceramic objects and similar piriform types have been found at numerous sites in Israel and abroad, and are generally classified as loom weights. Together with these conoid weights, doughnut-shaped weights are also traditionally identified Conoid

by scholars as loom weights. Gal has demonstrated that doughnut-shaped objects should not automatically be identified as loom weights as some may have functioned

as jar stoppers.38 He emphasizes the rarity of the vertical loom with weights in the ancient Near East. This apparent raritybegs the question of whether the identification of conoid weights as loom weights is erroneous, and, if so, what their function was. Loom weights function as a component of the warp-weighted loom, in which an

upper beam is supported by two posts and a warp is stretched between the beam and a series of weights. The weights are generally made of stone or clay and have a pierced hole, to which a bunch of warp threads are tied.39Although the warp-weighted loom was

considered relatively slow and clumsy, the variable tension permitted many varieties of weaves, and it was widely used in Egypt during the 18th and 19th Dynasties and in the Classical period.40 At that time, although commonly replaced vertical loom,41 the warp-weighted loom was still used in by the double-beamed weaving the tunica recta for boys attaining manhood dresses and amuletic yellow veils for brides.42 Possible pictorial depictions of warp-weighted

38

and

in preparing wedding second-millennium B.C.E.

looms may be seen in Linear A

ideographic

.Gal: Loom Weights or Jar Stoppers? IEJ 39 (1989), pp. 281-283. Gal's research does not preclude the use of doughnut-shaped weights as loom weights, since the examples fromKhirbet Rosh Zayit may be in secondary use. On thepossibility of producing textiles with doughnut-shaped loom weights, seeA. Sheffer:The Use of Perforated Clay Balls on theWarp-weighted Loom, Tel Aviv 8 (1981), pp. 81-83. For another misidentification, see G. Vogelsang-Eastwood: Crescent Loom weights? Oriens Antiquus 29 (1990), pp. 97-113; and J.Weingarten: The Sealing Structure ofKarah?y?k and Some Administrative Links with Phaistos on Crete (with an appendix on the sealings fromUronarti Fort), op. cit., pp.

63-95.

39 For a recent treatment of this subject, see E.J.W. Barber: Prehistoric Textiles, The Development of Cloth in theNeolithic and Bronze Ages, Princeton, 1991, pp. 91-113. See also R.J. Forbes: Studies in Ancient Technology, IV, Leiden, 1964, pp. 200-207, esp. p. 203; G.M. Crowfoot: Of theWarp-weighted Loom, Annual of theBritish School at Athens 37 (1936-1937), pp. 36-47; H.L. Roth: Ancient Egyptian and Greek Looms, Halifax, 1913,pp. 1-41. 40 G.M. Crowfoot: Textiles, Basketry, and Mats, in C. Singer et al. (eds.): A History of Technology, New York, 1954,Fig. 275, 277; Forbes (above, n. 39), p. 200, Fig. 29, p. 203. Crowfoot (above, n. 39), p. 36. Classical: Crowfoot, op. cit., p. 41, Fig. 4. 41 Forbes (above, n. 39), p. 207. 42 Crowfoot (above, n. 39), p. 40. In fact, the depiction of warp-weighted looms on Greek vases may be an artistic reification of what Gordon termed 'worthy of saga', i.e. that the use of this loom for special or religious weaves made it a worthy artistic subject. See CH. Gordon: 77m? Ancient Near East, New York, 1965,p. 155. ,

146

EZRA MARCUS AND MICHAL ARTZY

signs at Knossos and Hagia Triada and in rock carvings from northern Italy dated to the fourteenth century B.C.E.43 In lieu of incontrovertible pictorial evidence for the use of the warp-weighted the basin before the first millennium B.C.E., loom in the Eastern Mediterranean device is based exclusively on the existence of objects to later loom weights.44 Ceramic weights are generally analogous morphologically found in contexts without any clear functional association. At Knossos, 400(!) II period.45 weights are reported, many piriform and dating from theMiddle Minoan appearance

of this weaving

loom weights (and some with graffiti) were found on Crete at Palaikastro, and Zakros.46 A lone conoid weight was found at the Middle Cypriote in eastern Cyprus.47 Groups of conoid weights have been found site of Kalopsidha numerous at sites in Israel, ranging from theMB IIA to the LB I Age: Megiddo, Tell

Stamped Phaistos

Beit Mirsim,

Ta'anach,

Jericho, Gezer, Tel Qashish,

Kabri

and Tel

Ifshar.48 Lone

43 A. Evans: Palace ofMinos at Knossos, 4:2, New York, 1964, p. 678, Fig. 661:7; and Barber (above, n. 39), p. 92, Fig. 3.12. From northern Italy, see Barber (above, n. 39), p. 91, Fig. 3.11. 44 Barber (above, n. 39), pp. 92-94, with the exception of Troy, where the archaeological context suggests theuse of thewarp-weighted loom, see C. Biegen: Troy, Princeton, 1950, 1:2, p. 350, Figs. 333-334, 461. 45 Evans (above, n. 43), 1,p. 253. 46 J.P. Olivier: The Relationship between Inscriptions on Hieroglyphic Seals and Those Written on Archival Documents, inPalaima (above, n. 18),p. 17; I. Pini: The Hieroglyphic Deposit and theTemple Repositories at Knossos, in ibid., p. 36; and R.W. Hutchinson: at Unpublished Objects from Palaikastro and Praisos, Annual of the British School Athens 40 (1939-1940), p. 49. 47 P. ?str?m: The Middle Cypriote Bronze Age (The Swedish Cyprus Expedition 4:IB), Lund, 1972, p. 157. 48 W.F. Albright: The Excavations of Tell Beit Mirsim II, The Bronze Age, AAS OR 17 (1938), PL 45:1-8 (Stratum D, MB IIB); Albright furtherreports similar loom weights from a MB II context at Shechem, ibid., p. 56. P.W. Lapp: The 1968 Excavations at 195 (1969), p. 47, among over 50 examples, none was later than Tell Ta'annek, BASOR LB I, which agrees with the chronological range atMegiddo fromStratum XIII-IX. The numerous weights inRoom 41 in Jericho are believed to represent the equipment of a weaver's shop, I. Ziffer:At thatTime theCanaanites Were in theLand: Daily Life in the Middle Bronze Age2, 2000-1550 B.C.E., Tel Aviv, 1990,p. 52*, Fig. 12.Macalister (above, n. 12), pp. 73-75, Fig. 268 a, b, c, suggested that the 'weaver'sweights' fromGezer found in all his Semitic strata (eight impressedwith a scarab seal) were made by professional potters.One weight was reported from a MB IIC context byW.G. Dever et al:. Gezer II, Report of the 1967-70 Seasons inFields I and II, Jerusalem, 1974,Fig. 40:2. H. Berniek and R. Greenberg (Tel Qashish 1987Season, Excavations and Surveys inIsrael 6 [1988], p. 109) reportweights in a MB II structure.A. Rosenberger (Loom Weights fromArea D and C, inA. Kempinski andW.-D. Niemeier [eds.]: Excavations at Kabri, Preliminary Report of 1990 Season, 5, Tel Aviv, 1991, pp. 7*, 19-21, PI. 14:3, 4, 5) reports seven weights, among them three in theMB IIB palace. For a single scarab-stamped conoid weight found on the surface of themound, see R. Giveon: Egyptian Seals from theWestern Galilee,

147

LOOM WEIGHT FROM TEL NAMI

conoid weights are also known from a number of other sites: Tel Mevorakh, Bahan, el-Far'ah (N) and Akhziv.49 None of these examples, however, has yet been found or documented in an archaeological context that would confirm by itself the use of the warp-weighted loom in this region.

Tell

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE IMPRESSION AND THE WEIGHT evidence exists for the use of the warp-weighted loom in the Aegean and Anatolia, direct positive evidence for its use in the southern Levant is still lacking.

While

the alternative suggestions for these weights offered so far (cultic or food are unsubstantiated and unsatisfactory.50 Any discussion of their function heaters) should consider the relationship between the seal impression and the weight, as

However,

well as the difference between impressed and unimpressed weights. That the act of impressing the weight was of some significance, whether functional or symbolic, is an underlying premise of this discussion.51 The stamping of objects such as

ceramic weights is a practice unknown in Egypt, where impression by a scarab seal was limited to the act of sealing or authenticating a container, bound commodity,

inM. Yedaya (ed.): Qadmoniyot Galil HaMaaravi, Tel Aviv, 1986 (Hebrew), pp. 82-83, and A. Kempinski (Excursus A: The Scarab Impression on a Loom Weight, inKempinski and Niemeier, op.cit., pp. 7*-8*, 22), who notes that this impressionwas made by a signet ring bearing a design attempting to imitate the seal of an Egyptian official. In Stratum G at Tel Ifshar (last phase of theMB IIA period at the site), 27 weights were found, all

in a 3.5

concentrated

sq.m.

area.

They

range

between

385.5-844.5

gm. The

authors

thank thedirectors of theEmek Hefer Project, Drs. Y. Porat and S. Paley, for allowing E. Marcus

to examine

these finds

and

refer to them here.

49 E. Stern (ed.): Excavations at Tel Mevorakh (1973-1976), Part Two, The Bronze Age (Qedem 18), Jerusalem, 1984, p. 63, PL 45 (Stratum XIII, MB IIB). For Bahan, see Y. Porat et al.: Qadmoniyot Emek-Hefer, Tel Aviv, 1985,p. 221, Fig. 105:2 (Hebrew). J.Mallet: Tell el-F?r'ah II, Le BronzeMoyen, Paris, 1987,Fig. 24:1-3,5; Pl. LXXXIL1-3. E. Marcus noted a single conoid weight on display in the youth hostel at Akhziv that is claimed

to have

been

found

on

the mound.

50 Mazar suggested that the 80 IronAge weights found near a baking oven were clay heaters for keeping food warm. These examples are not nearly as well made as the type under discussion, see B. Maisler (Mazar): The Excavations at Tell Qasile: Preliminary Report, IEJ 1 (1950-1951), p. 197, PL 39B. Lapp also ascribes a cultic heat-storing function to these objects (above, n. 48), p. 47, n. 78; and idem,Taanach by theWaters ofMegiddo, A4 30 (1967), p. 25. 51 On objects subject to impression, see B. Magness-Gardiner: The Function of Cylinder Seals in Syrian Palace Archives, inPalaima (above, n. 18), p. 64. For the symbolic nature of otherwiseunintelligible (in thiscase legal) acts, seeM. Malul: Studies inMesopotamian Legal Symbolism (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 221), Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1988; on sealing, see esp. pp. 301-304. The authors thankDr. Malul for clarifying thispoint and discussing other aspects of this topic.

148

EZRA MARCUS AND MICHAL ARTZY

document, or room.52 Nevertheless, the act of using an Egyptian design scarab presumes, at the very least, an Egyptian cultural orientation. The by a Canaanite presence of such an object, whatever the meaning associated with the design or the act of impressing, was a measure of the Tel Nami population.

of the predilection

of a member

(or members)

If there is some functional difference between scarab-impressed and unimpressed difference between the two types.53 If weights, it is not evident in any morphological the weight of the impressed weights were of some consistency, a common multiple for some system of measure might be inferred.54Consistency of weight would have been desirable, ifnot essential, for weavers to maintain proper tension on the warp,

producing an even weave. They could also be used in the creation of unusual weaves requiring varied tension. It has been suggested that the presence of seal impressions on vase handles and loom weights at Cretan sitesmay be representative of some sort of control and organization of production.55 This being the case, such impressions might be trademarks or references to differentweave types.56 the other hand, there could be evidence for the metrological use of conoid weights, as suggested by Giveon.57 A tomb painting from Beni Hasan, dating from the 12thDynasty, depicts a balance scale with two sets of objects being weighed. The On

right pan contains an object similar to a bell-shaped Megiddo weight. The balance is indicated by a plummet showing the verticality of the upright; this plummet could easily be one of the vertically-pierced weights at Megiddo.58 Admittedly, this suggestion is highly speculative, since we do not know from what material the object

depicted was made.

52

53 54

55 56

. Williams: Aspects of Sealing and Glyptic inEgypt before theNew Kingdom, inMcGuire Gibson and R.D. Biggs (eds.): Seals and Sealings in theAncient Near East (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 6), Malibu, 1977, pp. 135-140. Similarly noted by Rosenberger (above, n. 48), p. 19.At present the number of properly published examples is quite small (21 scarab-impressedweights). See, e.g., G.F. Bass: Cape Gelidonya: A Bronze Age Shipwreck, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 57:8 (1967), pp. 135-142. A preliminary study indicates that several unit measures could be the basis for the published Tel Nami and Kabri weights. The Megiddo weights, weighed by E. Marcus, follow the same pattern and will be the subject of a future study. J.C. Poursat, inPalaima (above, n. 18), p. 55. The stamping of 'loom weights' is not limited to theBronze Age, see a Hellenistic example fromDor in E. Stern: Dor ? The Ruler of the Seas, Jerusalem, 1992, p. 98, Fig. 133

(Hebrew). 57 Giveon (above, n. 48). 58 F.L. Griffith (ed.): Beni Hasan, 4, London, 1900, p. 9, PL XXVII. Cf. Loud (above, n. 37), PL 170:18. An identical weight was found at Tel Ifshar. For a vertically-piercedweight fromMegiddo, see Loud, op. cit.,PL 169:3.

149

LOOM WEIGHT FROM TEL NAMI

A final possibility is that such objects served as administrative markers, and were tied around large vessels or sacks to indicate origin, ownership, or destination. Large pithoi, which were not sealed hermetically, would be covered with a cloth or leather

'loom weights' sack, then tied down, sealed and often stamped.59 Scarab-impressed Further markers.60 research be be reusable will required to test these might simply and other hypotheses.61 CONCLUSIONS

the function of stamped ceramic weights, the example from Tel Nami and the contemporary examples fromMegiddo not only provide a contemporaneous material link between these two sites, but should be considered Egyptianizing elements indicating contact with, and/or orientation towards, Egyptian culture during the

Whatever

Bronze IIA Age.62 Clearly, this impression is a welcome addition to a period fromwhich there is paucity of such evidence.63 The place of production and stamping of these objects should also be considered.64 Furthermore, the presence of this object at Tel Nami, a sitewhich has yielded well-stratified ceramic assemblages, provides an

Middle

additional

synchronism for the absolute chronology of theMiddle

Bronze

IIA Age

in Canaan.

59 Cf. M. Marcus: Glyptic Style and Seal Function, The Hasanlu Connection, in Palaima (above, n. 18), pp. 177-178, PL XXVILb. 60 Cf. Magness-Gardiner (above, n. 51), p. 64. 61 The need to document such objects in excavations (especially those ingroups) should be a primary concern. Moreover, a typology of theseweights is certainly needed. Gal's belief that a weight of 500 gm. is too heavy forweaving should be reconsidered (above, n. 38), p. 281. Many of the weights fromTel Ifshar are over 800 gm.; some of theMegiddo weights

are also

at least

that heavy.

62 Ironically, itwas the absence of red crowns confrontedatMegiddo, Ruweise, Jericho and Tell el-Far'ah (S) and the recognition that the detail was especially connected with the reign ofAmenemhet III that ledTufnell to suggest thatEgyptian influenceon Palestinian siteswas minimal at that time, see SS SII, p. 119. 63 Cf. Ward (above, . 31), p. 531. 64 Samples of the clay from theTel Nami weight have already been taken as part of a larger NAA studyand will be published in the future. Since this article was submitted a number of relevant publications have appeared, albeit too late to be incorporated. D. Ben-Tor (The Historical Implication of Middle Kingdom Scarabs Found in Palestine Bearing Private Names and Titles of Officials, BAS OR 294 [1994], pp. 7-22) documents an aspect of the process of Egyptianization in theLevant during the period under discussion. Egon .E. Lass (Quantitative Studies in Floatation at Ashkelon, 1986 to 1988,BASOR 294 [1994], pp. 22-38) demonstrates how microscopic studiesmay document the operation of looms in the archaeological record.