Israel Museum Studies in Archaeology Volume 8 · 2016‒2017

Israel Museum Studies in ArchaeologyVolume 8 • 2016‒2017

An annual publication ofThe Samuel and Saidye Bronfman Archaeology Wing,The Israel Museum, Jerusalem

This volume was made possible byThe Montgomery Securities and FriendsEndowment Fund of the Israel Museum

Additional support was provided byDr. David and Jemima Jeselsohn, Zurich

Editor: Silvia RozenbergAssociate editors: Shirly Ben-Dor Evian, Debby Hershman English editor: Miriam Feinberg VamoshAdvisory Board: Tallay Ornan, Rina Talgam, Haim Goldfus

Design adaptation: Batya SegalOriginal design concept: Masha PozinaPrinted by Elinir Digital Print, Petah Tikva

All correspondence and papers for publication should be addressed to:

The EditorIsrael Museum Studies in ArchaeologyThe Israel Museum, JerusalemP.O.B. 71117, Jerusalem 9171002Israel

E-mail address: shirlybde@imj.org.il

ISSN 1565-3617© The Israel Museum, Jerusalem, 2017All rights reserved

Front cover: Bronze candelabra and lamps from a Byzantine hoard, 6th century CE

Back cover: Bezel design of a bronze signet ring from a Byzantine hoard, 6th century CE (drawn from the positive)

Yigal Bloch and Laura A. Peri 2 I Placed My Name There: The Great Inscription of Tukulti-Ninurta I,

King of Assyria, from the Collection of David and Cindy Sofer, London

Rachel Caine Kreinin 57 “Divine Reflexivity”: a Case Study of Greco-Roman Egyptian Terracotta

Figurines from the Collection of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem

Orit Peleg-Barkat, Hillel Geva and 74 A Monumental Herodian Ionic Capital Ronny Reich from the Upper City of Jerusalem

Ronny Reich 89 Addendum 1: Where was the Capital Incorporated?

Orit Peleg-Barkat, Hillel Geva 91 Addendum 2: A Monumental Herodian Ionic Capital from the Royal Stoa? – a Reply to Ronny Reich

Tali Sharvit 97 A Marble Sphinx Statue from Horvat Omrit

Moshe Fischer, Arie Nissenbaum and 116 Appendix: Yannis Maniatis Marble Analysis of the Omrit Sphinx

Karni Golan, Haim Goldfus and 117 Why Hide? – Hoarding in Late David Mevorah Antiquity in View of a Byzantine Hoard from Israel

Bruno Callegher 162 A Hoard of Byzantine Folles (ca. 610 CE) within a Hoard of Bronze Objects: Some Hypotheses 170 Information for Contributors

171 Abbreviations

Contents

The Numismatic Department of the Israel Museum holds a hoard of

476 bronze coins from the 4th–early 7th centuries CE.1 The oldest coins date to 325–326 CE while the most recent are of the Byzantine Emperor Focas, minted between 603 and 610 CE.

The hoard appears to have been found inside a pottery jar2 that in turn was buried with other 30 bronze objects (candelabra, oil lamps, steelyard balances, jewelry, signet rings and varia)3 inside a large pithos.4 All these objects reached the museum from a private individual and not from an archaeo-logical dig. Similar mixed hoards of coins and artifacts in bronze are rather rare but are not nonexistent in the area of historical Palestine.5

It is believed that all the finds (pottery vessels and bronze objects), come from the Gaza Strip.6 However, this assumption raises many doubts because finds that come from the market or from an acquisition not verifiable in situ are deprived of the reliability assured only by an archaeological dig or from a verification in loco.

It is not within my expertise to evaluate whether the various copper objects, some with Christian religious or ceremonial function but also in everyday or secular use, were placed in the pithos without being modified or bent to facilitate their insertion. Caution is also required regarding the patinas and the presence or absence of oxidation inside the pithos.7

From the numismatic point of view, the doubts extend to the supposed container of the coins. The relationship between the hoard of 476 coins and the pottery containers appears to have been established by default, but without positive proof.8 If on the one hand the consistency of the patinas, corro-sions and the fact that many coins were fused together constitutes proof that the 476 coins

A Hoard of Byzantine Folles within a Hoard of Bronze Objects: Some Hypotheses

Bruno CallegherUniversità degli Studi di Trieste

IMSA 8 • 2016–2017: 162–169 163

belonged to the same hoard, on the other, the connection with the coins’ container seems less certain because no incrustations or metal deposits appear to have been found inside it. Such incrustations and deposits would have been inevitable given the contact between clay and bronze coins over many centuries. It is also difficult to explain the lack of clear typological comparisons with similar containers of the same period, the beginning of the 7th century CE.9

In terms of numismatic analysis, the certainty is that the 476 coins belong to a single concealment. In this case the other questions, i.e., type and chronology of the container, dating of the bronze objects, insertion in the pithos, are secondary.

Composition of the Coin HoardThe coins have only been partly restored; hence their interpretation, certain for the denomination, issuing authority and mint, is not completely accurate for the year and other elements that could more precisely classify them vis-a-vis the most recent cata-logues of Byzantine coinage.

The oldest coins are two large-diam-eter folles from the Constantine period. The first of these, of the providentiae avgg or caess type, was minted at Antioch between 325 and 327.10 The second was issued by the Herakleia mint between 325 and 326, by Constantine I for Constant II.11

These are followed by 12 Byzantine half folles. The legible ones, almost all issued at Constantinople, include a Justinian I coin,12 while that of Justin II and Sophia was struck at Antioch.13 All the other coins (approximately 460) are folles produced during the reigns of Anastasius and Phocas. The majority of the 40 nummi of Anastasius, all from Constantinople, belong to the type with the numeral M, with a cross above and two stars at the sides (fig. 1), mainly

from the Δ and ∈ workshops, an issue that can be dated to between 512 and 518, at the time of the second reform of the weight of copper coins.14

The next ones, of Justin I, feature the numeral M surmounted by a cross, which is repeated on the right-hand side, while a star appears on the left.15 Almost all the examples for this emperor were also produced in Constantinople, but some were

164 B. Callegher: A Hoard of Byzantine Folles

Fig. 1Anastasius (512–518), Reverse of follis, Anastasius. Mint: Constantinople. (see also Hahn and Metlich 2000, pl. 3: 27).

Fig. 2Justinian I (538–539), obverse of follis. Mint: Constantinople, (see also Hahn and Metlich 2000, pl. 20: 95a).

Fig. 3Justinian I (538–539), reverse of follis. Mint: Constantinople

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

issued in Nicomedia16 and Antioch.17 The Justinian folles are the most numerous. Most of the latter, produced by the Constantinople mint, belong to the issues preceding the reform in 538, as the types identified so far have various mint marks (stars, crosses, half-moons) f lanking the numeral M and only in a few cases the numbers of the year XII18 (figs. 2, 3), XIII, XIIII and ΧΜI. Until Justinian, therefore, the coins testify to a dominant role of the Constantinople mint in supplying the Palestine area with bronze currency, the significant number of folles

from Antioch (figs. 4, 5, 6, 7) and a small number from Nicomedia notwithstanding. This hegemony may have altered with Justin II: The few coins of this emperor, identified with certainty, come from Nicomedia and Antioch.

There are also at least 21 Tiberius II folles in the cache. It was under under Tiberius’ authority that that Constantinople made a reappearance, alongside Nicomedia and Antioch, yet Tiberius II folles are always in the minority. This group includes a follis on which an M appears in the typical form, which signals the adoption of italics cursive to indicate the value 40 nummi, datable to 578–579.19 The hoard is completed by a follis of Phocas (603–610), overstruck on a Mauricius Tiberius coin, with the numeral XXXX, datable to 603–610 (figs. 8, 9).

Although the exact composition still remains to be defined, several components of significant interest are already apparent, thus from the outset attaching considerable importance to this cache, both for obtaining information on bronze currency toward the end of the 6th century and identifying the reasons it was gathered together and then concealed.

IMSA 8 • 2016–2017: 162–169 165

Fig. 4Justinian I (531–532), obverse of follis, emperor seated on a throne. Mint: Antioch (see also Hahn and Metlich 2000, pl. 24: 130)

Fig. 5Justinian I (531–532), reverse of follis, Mint: Antioch

Fig. 6Justinian I (536–537), obverse of follis, Mint: Antioch (see also Hahn and Metlich 2000, pl. 24: 131)

Fig. 7Justinian I (536–537), reverse of of follis, Mint: Antioch

Fig. 8Phocas (603–610), obverse of of follis, Mint: Constantinople? (see also Hahn 1975, pl. 32: 61–62)

Fig. 9Phocas (603–610), reverse of follis, Mint: Constantinople? Drawing of the Mauricius Tiberius original coin. Mint: Thessalonike

Fig. 4 Fig. 8

Fig. 5 Fig. 9

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Preliminary Observations An initial observation regards the prolonged circulation of the Constantinian follis, still in use two centuries after it was minted. In general this type of low-value coin was progressively withdrawn from circulation at the time of the reform of Anastasius (498).Cases of survival do exist,20 albeit rarely, until the latter half of the 6th century, as can be found, for example, in the census of the treasures regarding bronze hoards from Palestine and Syria under the Byzantine Empire.21 In fact, their presence in a cache of the early 7th century is unusual. It is also possible that these old folles were tariffed at the value of the smallest denominations issued by the mints of the period, probably pentanummi. The latter denomination was struck throughout the 6th century, from Anastasius to Maurice Tiberius, and crudely imitated only in Byzantine Palestine as local production to supply small-denomination coinage.22 As for the Byzantine coins, the percentage distribution by denominations, authorities and mints is very similar to that observed so far in numerous other hoards of the region, for example at Ma‘oz Haim,23 Qabri,24 Qedumim,25 Qazrin,26 Khirbet Dubel,27 Khirbet Fandaqumya,28 Khirbet Deir Dassawi (1960),29 Mount Nebo30 and Amman.31

This hoard contains a preponderance of Anastasius, Justinian I and Justin I light folles, almost always from Constantinople, with the identical standard weight of 1/18 of a pound. There are very few heavy folles of 538–542. This absence can be explained by their limited circulation; they were competing with the lighter-weight series of identical nominal value, and were therefore withdrawn from circulation shortly after they were issued.32 The hoard also only contains a few Tiberius II and Mauricius Tiberius folles with the weight reduced

to 1/24 of a pound. This would seem to suggest that hoarding of bronze coins of good weight began of the weight reduction enacted by Tiberius II and confirmed by Mauricius Tiberius.

As to the reason for hiding the cache, this can very probably be attributed to the events of 610–615, when the entire region of Palaestina was involved in the Persian war for the conquest of Syria and Palestine and which triggered a widespread phenomenon of concealment of both gold and bronze coins. Evidence for this theory can be seen when comparing the most recent coin from certain gold caches, where such comparisons were possible, and the military events of 610–615. These are the hoards from the Jerusalem Citadel (solidi and tremisses),33 Haifa-Bat Galim (solidi),34 the Khirbet Marus synagogue (mixed hoard of half folles, folles, tremisses, semisses and solidi),35 the Giv‘ati Parking Lot, Jerusalem,36 and the Temple Mount, Jerusalem.37

This ample documentation of hoards of either gold or copper money and also of coins in both metals, can only be traced to a single event that induced people of different ranks to preserve their savings or what they had available at that moment. Our bronze coin hoard therefore finds a plausible expla-nation in connection with other caches of the same area, an explanation consistent with the chronology of the most recent coin in the various hoards.

I would tend to exclude a later con-cealment, during the military campaigns of Heraclius against the Persians, the events that led to the progressive Arab conquest of Palestine and Syria starting from the battle of Yarmouk (636), the monetary interven-tions that led to the opening of local mints where the Arab-Byzantine series was issued, or to the phase immediately prior to the reform of ‘Abd al-Malik (696–697). If this

166 B. Callegher: A Hoard of Byzantine Folles

were the case, between the date of the most recent coin identified in the hoard (603–610) and a theoretical concealment at the end of the 7th century (a hypothesis that could be put forward on the basis of the chronology of some copper objects believed to belong to the same bronze hoard), coins of other Byzantine emperors, of the Arab-Byzantine series or even of the first Umayyad issues38 would also have been collected and conserved. The absence of coins for a century conflicts with the economic rules and criteria for hoarding money, even of copper. Instead, it is of greater interest to attempt to place a value on the 476 bronze coins in our hoard and discover who would have collected and concealed them.

The collection of 4th century folles, decanummi and 40 nummi has a value of about 18,800 nummi as units of account, equal to approximately 1 solidus and 1 semis, if the weight ratio is accepted of the follis cut to 1/18 of a pound (ca. 18 g theoretical/ ca. 16 g average weight) and a ratio of 1:360 between solidus and follis, as would seem to have been settled on in the last decades of the 6th century, also at the rate of value of a solidus versus 20 pounds of copper. In this regard, it would be interesting to learn the total weight of all the copper objects, as this would provide information useful for hypothesizing values in units of account (nummi) or in actual currency, either in folles or solidi.

As previously mentioned, it is believed that the coins were hidden in a pottery vessel that had been placed inside a much larger jar together with bronze objects, many with a religious function. This suggests that the collection probably belonged to a monastery or church and that when danger threatened, objects and coins would have been quickly hidden to protect them from looting. This hoard is now of considerable interest to the

field of numismatics and more generally for the documentation of the bronze objects. Nevertheless, establishing a connection between this cache and the economic activi-ties of a monk or a monastery merely on the co-presence of religious artifacts, including a signet ring with the possible image of a monk,39 while an interesting hypothesis, is one destined to remain unproved. Even if trade and exchanges in money in the monasteries are well known and studied,40 the absence of secure archaeological data becomes the main weakness to reach a convincing conclusion.

1 I wish to thank Haim Gitler, chief curator of the Archaeological Wing, Israel Museum, Jerusalem, for his invitation to study this hoard. The descrip-tion is the result of my visit to the storerooms of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem where David Mevorach, senior curator of Roman and Byzantine Archaeology and his scientific staff showed me the entire hoard and discussed some problems regarding these finds. My thanks go to him. All photos and drawings are the property of the Israel Museum.

2 Golan 2007, 106, cat. 32. see photograph on p. 159 here.

3 Golan, Goldfus and Mevorach in this volume.4 Golan, Goldfus and Mevorach, cat. 31 in this

volume.5 An example, with relevant bibliography, is found

in Hirschfeld and Gutfeld 2008, Chapter 1. In this case, however, the coins are of the 12th century. Other examples are found in Golan 2007.

6 Golan 2007, 37, the hoard “was said to have been found in the greater Gaza area some thirty years ago”. For those with experience of coin finds, this is a topographic-chronological stylistic element.

7 See Golan, Goldfus and Mevorach in this volume.8 Golan 2007, 106, and Golan, Goldfus and

Mevorach in this volume, cat. no. 32. In addition, the coins’ container has no comparisons with other similar finds in clay.

9 Useful and relevant comparisons could not be carried out, at least as far as it concerns the corpora of the Palestinian pottery of the Roman, Byzantine and Early Islamic periods both for the jug and the pithos (Golan, Goldfus and Mevorach, in this volume). As a consequence, in my opinion,

IMSA 8 • 2016–2017: 162–169 167

the dating to the 6th–7th centuries CE (Golan 2007, 117; Golan, Goldfus and Mevorach, p. 117 in this volume) should represent only a terminus post quem for the hoarding of metal artifacts and coins. Contrary to what Karni Golan (2007, 103) indicates, the pithos found in Nessana (Colt 1962, 296, n. 133), dated to the “Arabic – after 636 CE,” period displays different morphological charac-teristics. Apart from the f lat bottom that associ-ates them, the rim of the pithos from Nessana is decisively more turned outward and its handles are more curved toward the top while the ones of the pithos from Gaza form an angle of 90°. For this information, I am indebted to Anna Lena.

10 Bruun 1966, 688, nos. 63–66; 690, nos. 71–74.11 Bruun 1966, 551, no. 78.12 Hahn and Metlich 2000, pl. 20: 91.13 Hahn 1975, pl. 6: 58c.14 Hahn and Metlich 2000, pl. 3: 27.15 Hahn and Metlich 2000, pl. 7: 11. 16 Hahn and Metlich 2000, pl. 7: 35.17 Hahn and Metlich 2000, pl. 9: 58. 18 On this monetary reform cf. Zuckerman 2004,

81–85; Callegher 2006; Gandila 2012 and, more recently, Bijovsky 2012, 220–224; for links with the literature sources, cf. Ziche 2006.

19 Hahn 1975, pl. 11: 25.20 For the continuity of the Late Roman Period

bronze currency in Palestine, cf. Bijovsky 2000–2002.

21 See Noeske 2000, 576–714; Bijovsky 2012, 337, Table 64.

22 Bijovsky 2012, 291–293.23 Bijovsky 2012, 467, n. 48 (last coin: Maurice

Tiberius, 589/590).24 Bijovsky 2012, 467, n. 50 (not before 602).25 Bijovsky 2012, 467, n. 49 (not before 602).26 Ariel 1996 (last coin: Phocas, 607/608, mint:

Antioch); Bijovsky 2012, 467, n. 53.27 Lambert 1932 (last coin: Heraclius, 611/612);

Bijovsky 2012, 468, n. 56.28 Baramky 1938 (last coin: Heraclius, 611/612);

Bijovsky 2012, 468, n. 57.29 Rahmani 1964 (last coin: Phocas, 605/606):

Bijovsky 2012, 467, n. 52.30 Callegher (last coin: Maurice Tiberius, 601–602).31 Noeske 2000, 536–540 (last coin: Heraclius,

611–612, mint: Constantinople); 595–597 (last coin: Heraclius, 611–612, mint: Nicomedia);

632–634 (last coin: Phocas, 605–606, mint: Constantinople); 682–688 (last coin: Maurice Tiberius, 589–590, mint: Antioch).

32 Callegher 2006; Gandila 2012 and Bijovsky 2012, 220–224.

33 Bijovky 2012 467, n. 51 (not before 603).34 Bijovsky 2012, 467, n. 53 (last coin: Phocas,

607–610).35 Kindler 1986 (last coin: Phocas, 609/610); Bijovsky

2012, 468. n. 55.36 Bijovsky 2010 and 2012, 468, n. 60 (not before

610–614).37 Sandberg 2013 (last coin: Maurice Tiberius

583–601).38 On the bronze coins during the first half of the 7th

century, see Bijovsky 2012, 356–410.39 Golan, Goldfus and Mevorach in this volume, cat.

no. 18.40 On the economic life of monasteries in Palestine,

see Hirschfeld 1990; Hirschfeld 1998; Dauphin 1998; Morrisson and Ceynet 2002. See also Dobrinski, Gedderth and Wipfler 2007; Callegher 2016, 143–163 and the introductions and comments on the lives of monks in Di Segni 1990 and Di Segni 1991.

Bibliography

Ariel, D. T.1996 A Hoard of Byzantine Folles from Qazrin.

‘Atiqot 29: 69–76.

Baramky, J.1938 A Hoard of Byzantine Coins. QDAP 8:

81–85.

Bijovsky, G.2000–2002 The Currency of the Fifth Century C.E.

in Palestine – Some Reflections in Light of the Numismatic Evidence. Israel Numismatic Journal 14: 196–210.

2012 Gold Coin and Small Change: Monetary Circulation in Fifth-Seventh Century Byzantine Palestine. Trieste.

Bruun, P.M.

1966 The Roman Imperial Coinage. Constantine and Licinius A.D. 313–337. London.

Callegher, B.2006 La riforma della moneta di rame del 538

(Giustiniano I) e il ruolo della c.d. legge di Gresham. In I ritrovamenti monetali e la legge

168 B. Callegher: A Hoard of Byzantine Folles

di Gresham, eds. M. Asolati and G. Gorini, 129–154. Padova.

Un ‘tesoro’ dal Monte Nebo-Siyagha: folles bizantini del VI secolo per un controvalore di due tremissi. In Christ is here! Studies in Biblical and Christian Archaeology in Memory of Michele Piccirillo, ofm, ed. L.D. Chrupcała, 319–339. Milano.

2016 Anacoreti e cenobiti in Egitto e Palestina tra IV e VII secolo: l’imprescindibile “far di conto” monetario. In La società monas-tica nei secoli VI–XII. Sentieri di ricerca, Atelier jeunes chercheurs sur le monach-isme médiéval, Roma, 12–13 giugno 2014, ATTI 10, Collection de l’École française de Rome 515, eds. M. Bottazzi, P. Buffo, C. Ciccopiedi, L. Furbetta, Th. Granier, 143–163. Rome.

Colt, H.D. ed.1962 Excavations at Nessana (Auja Hafir, Palestine)

1. London.

Dauphin, C.1998 La Palestine byzantine. Peuplement Populations

1–3. BAR International Series 726. Oxford.

Di Segni, L.1990 Cercare Dio nel deserto. Vita di Caritone.

Magnano.

1991 Nel deserto accanto ai fratelli. Vita di Gerasimo, Vita di Giorgio di Choziba, Miracoli della Beata Vergine in Choziba. Magnano.

Dobrinski, C., Gedderth, B. and Wipf ler, K. eds.2007 Kloster und Wirtschaft im Mittelalter.

München.

Gandila, A.2012 Heavy Money, Weightier Problems: The

Justinianic Reform of 538 and Its Economic Consequences. Revue Numismatique 169: 363–402.

Golan, K.2007 The Hoard from the Gaza Area as a Test

Case for the Analysis and Classification of Hoards from Late Antiquity. M.A. thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.

Hahn, W., and Metlich, M. A.2000 Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire

(Anastasius I– Justinian I, 491–565). Vienna.

1975 Moneta Imperii Byzantini 2. Vienna.

Hirschfeld, Y.1998 The Judean Desert Monasteries in the

Byzantine Period. New Haven and London.

1990 List of Byzantine Monasteries in the Judean Desert. In Christian Archaeology in the Holy

Land: New Discoveries, eds. G. C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and E. Alliata, 1–90. Jerusalem.

Hirschfeld, Y., and Gutfeld, O.2008 Tiberias Excavations in the House of the

Bronze. Final Report I: Architecture, Stratigraphy and Small Finds. Qedem 48. Jerusalem.

Kindler, A.1986 The Synagogue Treasure of Meroth, Eastern

Upper Galilee, Israel. In Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of Numismatics, ed. J. A. Carradice, 315–230. London.

Lambert, C.1932 A Hoard of Byzantine Coins. QDAP 1:

55–68.

Morrisson, C., and Cheynet, J.-C.2002 Prices and Wages in the Byzantine World. In

The Economic History of Byzantium: From the Seventh through the Fifteenth Century, ed. A. E. Laiou, 815–878. Washington D.C.

Noeske, H.-C.2000 Münzfunde aus Ägypten I. Die Münzfunde

des ägyptischen Pilgerzentrums Abu Mina und die Vergleichsfunde aus den Dioecesen Aegyptus und Oriens vom 4.–8. Jh. n. Chr. Prolegomena zu einer Geschichte des spätrömischen Münzumlaufs in Ägypten und Syrien II. Berlin.

Rachmani, L.Y.1964 Two Hoards of Byzantine Coins and a

Roman Charm from Khirbet Deir Dassawi. Israel Numismatic Journal II/1–2: 19–23.

Sandberg, L.2013 The coins. In The Discovery of the Menorah

Treasure at the Foot of the Temple Mount, ed. E. Mazar, 77–90. Jerusalem.

Ziche, H.2006 Historians and the Economy: Zosimos and

Prokopios on Fifth- and Sixth-Century Economic Development. In Byzantine Narrative. Papers in Honour of Roger Scott, ed. J. Burke, 462–474. Melbourne.

Zuckerman, C.2004 Du village à l ’empire. Autour du registre fiscal

d’Aphroditô (525–526). Paris.

IMSA 8 • 2016–2017: 162–169 169

170

Information for Contributors

IMSA is a peer-reviewed journal. All manuscripts submitted to IMSA will be reviewed by the editorial board and by outside readers. Preference will be given to articles related to objects in the Israel Museum’s archaeological collections or presented in the depart-ment’s exhibitions. Manuscripts should be submitted in a PC format computer file using Word, accom-panied by three copies of all illustrations, also as computer files, and of an abstract (100 words or less), to: The Editor, Israel Museum Studies in Archaeology, Bronfman Wing, The Israel Museum, Jerusalem, P.O.B. 71117, Jerusalem 91710, Israel. A cover letter providing the title, author’s name, affiliation, mailing address, telephone number, and e-mail address should accompany all submissions.

When an article is accepted for publication, the author will be asked to provide a revised version of the manu-script that incorporates, where necessary, suggestions made by the editors and the readers and conforms to IMSA ’s reference system (described below). One hard copy of the revised manuscript and one electronic copy (f lash drive or email attachment) in Word should be re-submitted. The revised manuscript must be accompanied by original high-quality, camera-ready illustrations (photographs or drawings), numbered consecutively on the back. It is the responsibility of the author to obtain permission to reproduce any material protected by copyright. The revised manu-script should also be accompanied by a complete list of figures with captions and credit information and a full list of references used.

Authors should indicate any special problems, such as charts, diagrams, specific typesetting requirements, and provide computer files of any special fonts used. After design the final text and final figures/plates of the article will be sent to the authors for approval. At that stage, changes other than printer’s errors may not be allowed. Upon publication, authors will receive a pdf version of their article as printed.

Reference System

Reference lists should be prepared according to the following guidelines:

Book by a single author

Rahmani, L. Y.1999 A Catalogue of Roman and Byzantine Lead

Coffins from Israel. Jerusalem.

Book with a main title and subtitle

Galavaris, G.1970 Bread and the Liturgy: The Symbolism of

Early Christian and Byzantine Bread Stamps. Madison, Milwaukee, and London.

Book by more than one author

Ovadiah, R., and Ovadiah, A.1987 Hellenistic, Roman, and Early Byzantine

Mosaic Pavements in Israel. Rome.

Book with editor as author

Tsafrir, Y., ed.1993 Ancient Churches Revealed. Jerusalem.

Book in more than one volume

Note that the name of the book and the name of the volume are italicized, but not the volume number. Volume numbers for books should be given in either Arabic or Roman figures, depending on how they appear on the volume.

Buchanan, B., and Moorey, P. R. S.1988 Catalogue of Ancient Near Eastern Seals in the

Ashmolean Museum III, The Iron Age Stamp Seals. Oxford.

When a volume in a multi-volume work has two or more parts

Fugmann, E.1958 Hama II.1, L’architecture des périodes pré-

hellénistiques. Copenhagen.

Book in a series

Bagatti, B.2001 Ancient Christian Villages of Galilee. Studium

Biblicum Franciscanum. Collectio Minor, no. 37. Jerusalem.

Chapter or titled part of a book

Welles, C. B.1938 The Inscriptions. In Gerasa: City of the

Decapolis, ed. C. H. Kraeling, 355–494. New Haven.

Journal article

Rahmani, L. Y.1988 Roman Lead Coffins in the Israel Museum

Collection. The Israel Museum Journal 7: 47–60.

Entry in a reference work (encyclopedia, lexicon, dictionary)

Volume numbers for books should be given in either Arabic or Roman figures, depending on how they appear on the volume.

Stager, L. E.1993 Ashkelon. The New Encyclopedia of

Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 1: 103–12. Jerusalem.

Ph.D. The Herodian Architectural Decoration, in

Light of the Finds from the Temple Mount Excavation. Ph.D. diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Hebrew).

IMSA 171

Notes should be prepared as endnotes according to the system shown here:1 Welles 1938, 484, no. 326.2 Rahmani 1999, 43–44, figs. 123, 137;

cf. Rahmani 1988, pl. II:3.3 For a somewhat similar depiction of an arched

ciborium over a cross, with a surrounding Greek inscription reading: “Blessing of the Lord on us,” see Galavaris 1970, 119, fig. 64 (from the Byzantine Museum, Athens). The provenance of the stamp, dated to ca. 600 CE, is unknown.

Abbreviations

AASOR The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Cambridge, Massachusetts

ADAJ Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. Amman

AJA American Journal of Archaeology. Archaeological Institute of America. Boston

‘Atiqot ‘Atiqot. Israel Antiquities Authority. Jerusalem

BAR Biblical Archaeology Review. Biblical Archaeology Society. Washington, DC

BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Boston

BCH Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique

CdE Chronique d’Égypte. Turnhout

EI Eretz-Israel. Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies. Israel Exploration Society, in cooperation with the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University. Jerusalem

ESI Excavations and Surveys in Israel. Israel Antiquities Authority. Jerusalem

HA Hadashot Arkheologiyot. Excavations and Surveys in Israel. Israel Antiquities Authority. Jerusalem (Hebrew)

IEJ Israel Exploration Journal. Israel Exploration Society and the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University. Jerusalem

IMJ The Israel Museum Journal. Jerusalem

IMSA Israel Museum Studies in Archaeology. The Israel Museum, Jerusalem

JdI Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Berlin

JGS Journal of Glass Studies. The Corning Museum of Glass. Corning, New York

JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies. Cambridge

JJS Journal of Jewish Studies. Oxford

JMA Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology. Sheffield

JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies. Chicago

JPOS The Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society. I–XXI. Jerusalem, 1920–1948

JRA Journal of Roman Archaeology. Portsmouth, Rhode Island

JSOR Journal of the Society of Oriental Research. Chicago

Levant Levant. The Council for British Research in the Levant. London

LA Liber Annuus. Studium Biblicum Franciscanum. Jerusalem

LIMC Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae. I–VIII. Zurich-Munich, 1981–1997

MAAR Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome. Rome

New Enc. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Israel Exploration Society. Jerusalem

PalJb Palästinajahrbuch des Deutschen evangelischen Instituts für Altertumswissenschaften des Heiligen Landes zu Jerusalem. Berlin. 1905–1941

PBSR Papers of the British School at Rome. London

PEQ Palestine Exploration Quaterly. Palestine Exploration Fund. London

Qadmoniot Qadmoniot. A Journal for the Antiquities of Eretz-Israel and Bible Lands. Israel Exploration Society and the Israel Antiquities Authority. Jerusalem (Hebrew)

QDAP The Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine. I–XIV. London, 1932–1950

Qedem Qedem. Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Jerusalem

RB Revue Biblique. L’École Biblique et Archéologique Française. Jerusalem

RM Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts (Römische Abteilung). Mainz am Rhein

SHAJ Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan. Amman

ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins. Leipzig

ZPE Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik. Bonn