Hellenization in Syria-Palestine: The Case of Judea in the Third Century BCE

Author(s): Robert Harrison

Source: The Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 57, No. 2 (Jun., 1994), pp. 98-108
Published by: The American Schools of Oriental Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3210387
Accessed: 31/08/2010 06:08
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asor.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
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 support@jstor.org.
The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Biblical Archaeologist.
http://www.jstor.org
Hellenization in
S y r ia-
Palestine: T h e C ase of
J u d ea
in th e T h ir d
C entu r y
B C E
Rv
Roh er f
Uar r ison
I.
4Gas
2,
41
4J
4 *
4S
4
4
f LA
442
4
1
i.3
4
0-
4 IF
Hellenization
is
u su ally
u nd er -
stood as th e
pr ocess th r ou gh
wh ich
post- classical
Gr eek civili-
zation
pr omoted
itself and assimilated
peoples
with an
ey e
towar d th e u nif ica-
tion of th e known wor ld into a
single
nation
sh ar ing
a common cu ltu r e. Accor d -
ingly ,
d iscu ssion h as
u su ally
f ocu sed
on h ow Gr eek cu ltu r al institu tions-
langu age, r eligiou s
belief s,
and social
mor es- wer e d isseminated f r om Mace-
d onia acr oss th e ancient Near E ast and
ser ved as th e cr u cible in wh ich
ind ige-
nou s
peoples
wer e assimilated into
Gr eek cu ltu r e.
B u t assimilation is a mu ltif aceted
pr o-
cess th at
pr ogr esses h eter ogeneou sly ,
both
in ter ms of its
geogr aph ical scope
and
its
impact
on var iou s
expr essions
of cu l-
tu r e. Given th is
mu ltilay er ed
d ef inition
of
Hellenization,
it is f air to
say
th at th e
entir e Levant was Hellenized (to some
d egr ee)
in th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E ,
insof ar
as all of
S y r ia- Palestine lay
with in th e
political
d omain of Alexand er and h is
su ccessor s. With
r egar d
to th e ter r itor ies
wh ich
eventu ally
f ell to th e
Ptolemies,
economic Hellenization
qu ickly
f ollowed
militar y conqu est.
T h e
speed
with wh ich
J ewish
land s wer e
incor por ated
into th e
. . . . . . . . . .
xN,
....... .....
Hellenistic
economy
is
d r amatically
illu s-
tr ated
by ar ch aeological
f ind s and
by
of f icial d ocu ments th at h ave su r vived
f r om th at er a.
T h ese
gener al d egr ees
of Helleniza-
tion seem to h ave been
u nif or mly pr e-
sent in Ptolemaic land s,
inclu d ing
th e
pr ovince
of
J u d ea,
d u r ing
th e
ear ly - mid
th ir d
centu r y
iC E . S u ch an extent of Hel-
lenistic inf lu ence was not with ou t its con-
sequ ences
in
J u d ean society .
B u t cou ld
it h ave af f or d ed
any
r eal
oppor tu nity
f or
ear ly
Hellenistic
J ews
in Palestine to
u nd er go
a
qu iet
cu ltu r al r evolu tion in
wh ich th eir
langu age,
social mor es, and
intellectu al tr ad itions wer e
ir r evocably
alter ed (or at least
u navoid ably
inf lu -
enced )? T h ese
potential
alter ations,
wh ich
lie at th e h ear t of wh at is
u su ally
d ef ined
as
Hellenization,
pr esu ppose
a
d egr ee
of
cu ltu r al
r eceptivity
th at was not
alway s
pr esent among
th e
peoples
wh o met th e
Gr eeks.
Mor eover ,
th ese
ch anges
occu r r ed
at su ch f u nd amental levels of cu ltu r e
th at not
ju st y ear s
bu t
gener ations
wer e
necessar y
to
accomplish
th em.
In
r eality ,
th e
aggr essive pan- cu ltu r al
Hellenization th at cou ld h ave
pu r pose-
f u lly accomplish ed
su ch a r evolu tion was
never
r eally
a concer n of Alexand er 's
su ccessor s.
Accor d ingly ,
Hellenism took
a
var iety
of
path s
and met with var iou s
d egr ees
of
"su ccess,"
d epend ing
on its
own inh er ent
str ength s
and weakness-
98 B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994)
L4344
. .
.
'

.
~W
"
L
, ,
L462
42i.
144453 Ip
0 5M
o15
es.
Having
f ou nd Hellenized lif e and
th ou gh t
to be
mater ially
and
spir itu ally
attr active,
some
r egions
of Palestine wer e
r evolu tionized - par ticu lar ly
th ose in
geogr aph ical
and economic
pr oximity
of
newly - f ou nd ed
Hellenistic cities.
J ews
wh o lived
bey ond
th e bor d er s of th e land
of Isr ael
(especially
in
Alexand r ia) wer e
af f ected mor e
qu ickly
and to a
gr eater
extent th an th eir
J u d ean compatr iots.
In
th e cou r se of th e late th ir d to mid - sec-
ond
centu r y ,
even th e
J ewish
h ear tland
f aced a limited cu ltu r al cr isis and u lti-
mately incor por ated
some
aspects
of
Hellenistic civilization into its
lar gely
tr ad itional belief s and
pr actices.
E ach
socio- national
conf igu r ation
mad e
peace- or
war - with th e Hellenes at
its own
pace,
on its own
ter ms,
with its
own inter nal var iations.
T h e
pr ocess
of Hellenization was a
complex, r egionalized ph enomenon
wh ich d emand s cau tiou s
inter pr etation.
T h e
compelling
attr action of Hellenistic
cu ltu r e mu st be balanced
against
th e
power
and
u niqu e conf igu r ations
of
native tr ad ition. It is
possible
th at some
aspects
of a
par ticu lar
cu ltu r e wer e
qu ickly
and
signif icantly
alter ed ,
wh ile
oth er
aspects
r emained
essentially
u n-
ch anged . Accor d ingly ,
a
car ef u lly
bal-
anced ,
cir cu mspect appr oach
is mor e
likely
to
pr od u ce
an accu r ate
pictu r e
of
Hellenism in th e ancient Near
E ast,
espe-
cially
in th e
u niqu e setting
of th ir d cen-
tu r y
B C E
J u d ea.
How and to wh at
d egr ee
was
J u d ea
Hellenized
d u r ing
th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E ?
S ch olar sh ip
h as of f er ed
many
d iver -
gent
answer s to th is
innocent- sou nd ing
qu estion, r anging
f r om
"completely
in
ever y way "
to "not at all." On th e
wh ole,
th e
only
common
gr ou nd
between th e
opposing
sid es of th is d ebate is th e f act
th at
near ly ever y stu d y
of
J u d ean
Hel-
lenization r elies almost
exclu sively
on
liter ar y
mater ial to bu ild its
case.1
Wh at
makes th is issu e so d if f icu lt is th e f act
th at r elevant d ocu ments ad mit sever al
equ ally plau sible inter pr etations.
Wh at
is
r equ ir ed
is a close consid er ation of
ar ch aeological
d ata f r om th e
per iod ,
d ata
th at h as been
slowly amassing
in scat-
ter ed excavation
r epor ts, monogr aph s,
and ar ticles.
T h e witness of
ar ch aeology h elps
to
sh ow th at th e Hellenization of th e Lev-
ant
d u r ing
th e er a of Ptolemaic d omi-
nation was a
pr ocess
even mor e
complex
th an it is
possible
to inf er f r om th e h is-
T h ir d - centu r y
f or tif ications at T el Dor u ti-
lized
compar tment bu ild ing,
th e f ir st Gr eek
bu ild ing tech niqu e
to be
copied
inPalestine.
However , Ph oenicianash lar constr u ctioncon-
tinu ed to d ominate both
pu blic
and
pr ivate
Palestinianmonu mental ar ch itectu r e u ntil th e
second
centu r y
B C E . (Fr om S tem 1988:12.)
tor ical
J ewish
d ocu ments of th e f ollow-
ing centu r y
T o be
su r e,
th e nu mber of th ir d cen-
tu r y
B C E sites
u nambigu ou sly
attested
and
scientif ically
excavated is somewh at
limited ,
and th e evid ence wh ich d oes
exist is f ar f r om
u nambigu ou s.
However ,
wh en th e available d ata ar e collected
and
sy nth esized ,
it becomes
possible pr o-
visionally
to
id entif y
a nu mber of
key
tr end s. T h ose tr end s can th en be
extr ap-
olated to
pr ovid e
some contr ol on th e
conf licting liter ar y
tr ad itions wh ich
pu r -
por t
to r ecou nt th e tr au matic events in
wh ich th e
sod cio- cu ltu r al d evelopments
of
th e
ear ly
Hellenistic
per iod
cu lminated .
T owar d th at
end ,
th is ar ticle r eviews th e
ar ch aeological
r emains f r om
J u d ea
and
its envir ons
d u r ing
th e th ir d
centu r y B C E .
It
pr oceed s
f r om th e
assu mption
th at th e
Hellenization of social institu tions and
B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994) 99
belief
sy stems
will f ind some r ef lection
in th e
ar ch aeological
r ecor d .2
T h e accessible
ar ch aeological
d ata f all
into th r ee br oad
categor ies:
nu mismatics;
monu mental r emains at
pr incipal
Hel-
lenistic
sites;
and miscellaneou s mater i-
al ar tif acts.
T h r ou gh ou t
th e
d iscu ssion,
d ata will be
applied
to th e issu e of Hel-
lenization's
pr ogr ess
in
J u d ea.
A f inal
su mmar y
will ou tline th e contr ibu tion
of
ar ch aeological
mater ials to th e d ebate.
Yeh u d coins like th ese wer e
pr obably
str u ck
inth e th ir d
centu r y
B C E u nd er
Ptolemy
II Ph ila-
d elph u s. T h ey
ar e all inscr ibed with Ar amaic or
paleo- Hebr ew legend s. Ranging
invalu e f r om
1/8
to
1/96
of a tetr ad r ach m, th eir
iconogr aph y
is
manif estly Hellenistic;
some also bear Gr eek
letter s. (Fr om Mesh or er 1982:184.)
Nu mismatics
Histor ians of th ir d
centu r y J u d ea
ar e f or -
tu nate to h ave at th eir
d isposal
a
good
d eal of nu mismatic evid ence. C oins f ir st
appear ed
in Palestine at least as
ear ly
as th e mid - sixth
centu r y
B C E ,
and
th ey
wer e in wid e u se
by
th e end of th e Hel-
lenistic
per iod . Du r ing
th e
ear ly
Ptole-
maic
er a,
th e coins f ou nd in
J u d ea
and
its
neigh bor ing
ter r itor ies cou ld be d i-
vid ed into two
essentially
d if f er ent,
y et
r elated ,
ty pes.
T h e existence in Palestine of coins
pr od u ced
in
major
Ptolemaic mints h as
been well- d ocu mented f or th e better
par t
of a
centu r y .
A d if f er ent ser ies of
coins,
appar ently
minted in
J u d ea,
h as come
u nd er
incr easing scr u tiny only
in th e last
d ecad e. T h ese so- called Yeh u d coins
d eser ve
close
attention becau se th eir in-
ter pr etation
bear s
h eavily
on
qu estions
su r r ou nd ing J u d ea's Hellenization,
so-
cial
str u ctu r e,
and
political
r elations
d u r ing
th e th ir d
centu r y .
At least
th ir ty ver y ear ly
coins in-
scr ibed with Ar amaic or Hebr ew letter s
h ave been
pu blish ed . T h ey compr ise
nineteen d istinct
ty pes.
Of th at
nu mber ,
nine coins
r epr esenting
f ive
ty pes
ar e
d atable to th e Ptolemaic er a
(Mesh or er
1982).
T h ese
ear ly J u d eo- Hellenistic
coins stand in wh at
appear s
to h ave
been a continu ou s ser ies th at
begins
in
th e mid - f ou r th
centu r y
B C E . T h is ser ies
was itself
pr obably
a continu ation of
th e old Ph ilisto- Ar abian coins. Af ter a
str ange
d r ach m inscr ibed in
Ar amaic,
th e ser ies of
tiny
coins continu es with a
gr ou p
of Ath enian "owl" imitations. It
th en
d evelops th r ou gh
sever al var ia-
tions of ar t and
inscr iption d u r ing
th e
late Per sian
per iod ,
and cu lminates in a
nu mber of coins wh ich bear th e
impr es-
sion of
Ptolemy
I, (301- 283 B C E ),
h is con-
sor t
B er nice,
and th e Ptolemaic
eagle.
T h e exact or d er and d ate f or th e ser ies
r emain a matter of d ebate
(Mild enber g
1978).
T ech nical d iscu ssions asid e,
wh at
appear s
su r e is th e exis-
tence of
J u d ean
coinage
in th e
ear ly - mid
th ir d
centu r y
B C E
bear ing
th e clear
stamp
of Hel-
lenistic inf lu ence.
T h e
pr oblems
in
establish ing
th e se-
r ies'
continu ity
and
or d er
pale
besid e
th r ee even mor e
d if f icu lt
qu estions.
Fr om wh at mint
wer e
th ey
issu ed ?
B y
wh ose
au th or ity
wer e
th ey
str u ck?
How d id
th ey
wp
C oins- like
th is silver d r ach m- ar e
notor iou sly
ambivalent wit-
nesses to cu ltu r al
ch ange.
T h is
pr obable Y(H)D coin, likely
issu ed in
J u d ea
d u r ing
th e Per sian
per iod , may
imitate oth er coins or u tilize
bor r owed motif s. Wh ile th e
sy mbols may
be
pagan, th ey migh t
h ave r eceived analter native
inter pr etationby
J ewish au th or ities.
Onth e r ever se, th e ar ch aic Ar amaic letter s Y
(a possible
Y- Hmono-
gr am)
D su r mou nt a
r oar ing, winged
lion
stand ing
onanu nknown
composite d esign. (Fr om Mesh or er 1982:28.)
f u nction in th e
J u d ean
and Ptolemaic
economies?
T h e Yeh u d coins wer e
pr obably
str u ck
in
J er u salem.
T wo coins h ave been f ou nd
in
str atigr aph ic
excavations in th e
J u d ean
capital;
one was u near th ed at B eth
Zu r ;
a f ou r th came f r om Ramat
Rah el;
and
a f ew mor e
specimens
su r f aced at T ell
J emmeh .
T h e oth er
coins,
now in
pr ivate
collections,
wer e f r om an ar ea sou th of
J er u salem,
east and west of th e r oad to
Hebr on. With no evi-
d ence to th e con-
tr ar y ,
it seems
r easonable to
assu me th at
th is limited
d istr ibu tion
points
to th e
existence of
a mint in
J er -
u salem.
B u t wh o
minted th e Yeh u d
coins,
and
wh y ?
T h e local
minting
au -
th or ity
f or th e Per sian
segment
of th e
ser ies seems to h ave lain with th e
gov-
er nor
(pe.ih )
of th e Ach aemenid
satr apy ,
Yeh u d . B u t th e
gover nor 's
name
and title
d isappear
f r om th e coins of th e
Yeh u d ser ies in th e Hellenistic
per iod .
T h u s th e th ir d
centu r y pr obably
saw a
sh if t in
monetar y au th or ity
f r om th e r e-
gional
Ptolemaic
str ategos
to th e
J ewish
h igh pr iesth ood .
In th e
ligh t
of th e
gr owing
secu lar ization and
politiciza-
tion of th at of f ice
d u r ing
th e
ear ly
Hel-
oll?
V F
44 lin,
100 B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994)
S ch olar s still d ebate th e exact
sequ ence
of th e th ir d
centu r y
Yeh u d coins. T h e r ever se of
th is coin
d epicts
a bir d
looking
over its sh ou l-
d er , su r r ou nd ed
by
th e
(u nu su al)
f u ll
spelling
of th e name of J u d ea.
6%
q~~f
T h e
coin
h as been
ar gu ed
to be
both th e ear liest
and th e latest in
th e Ptolemaic
Yeh u d ser ies. (Fr om
Mesh or er 1982:15.)
lenistic
per iod ,
it is
likely
th at th e ch ief
temple
of f icer s became
incr easingly
in-
volved in state economic
policy
and
power politics.
T h e late Ptolemaic Yeh u d coins wer e
d ear ly
issu ed at th e beh est of th e centr al
E gy ptian gover nment
in Alexand r ia. T h eir
r egu lar ity
and stand ar d
d esign point
to
th eir ch ar acter as Ptolemaic coins. T h ese
coins
r epr esent pr ovincial
issu es: wh ile
d ir ect
r esponsibility
of
ad minister ing
th em
lay
with local
au th or ities,
th is r ela-
tively insignif icant coinage
was
cer tainly
minted u nd er license f r om th e centr al
gover nment
f or u se in a
qu ite
cir cu m-
scr ibed local mar ket In th at
sense,
th ey
ar e
imper ial
coins wh ose Hebr ew
inscr ip-
tions
wer e,
f r om th e
per spective
of th e
Ptolemies,
mer ely
a
second ar y
d etail.
Wh oever minted th e Yeh u d
coins,
and at wh atever
location,
th e economic
pu r pose
of th e coins is clear . T h e Hel-
lenistic Yeh u d ser ies
compr ises
coins of
ver y
small d enominations. T h e
lar gest
ar e two
(ver y r ar e) h emid r ach ms,
wh ose
valu e was
only 1/8
of th e stand ar d Ptole-
maic
imper ial cu r r ency
minted in silver
tetr ad r ach ms. Far mor e nu mer ou s ar e
h emiobols
(1/48
of a
tetr ad r ach m)
and
tetar tmoir on
(1/96
of a
tetr ad r ach m).
T h ese
tiny
silver coins wer e th e small
ch ange
of th eir
d ay ,
local issu es to ser ve th e ex-
ch ange
need s of a
constitu ency
limited
both in nu mber and in wealth .
T h e
ver y
existence of th e Hellenistic
Yeh u d coins bear s
eloqu ent testimony
to th e extent and
speed
with wh ich th e
Ptolemies assu med contr ol over th e
f led gling monetar y economy
of th eir
Palestinian ter r itor ies. With in a
ver y
f ew
d ecad es of
establish ing
clear title to
sou th er n
C oele- S y r ia,
th e Ptolemies h ad
incor por ated
even th e
insignif icant
J u d ean
mint into th eir
monetar y sy stem.
T h e stand ar d Ptolemaic ch ar acter of th e
later Yeh u d coins d emonstr ates
d ear ly
th e r u ler s' immed iate inter est in even
th e smallest d etails of th e
pr ovince's
economic lif e. T h e coins stand in a con-
tinu ou s ser ies th at
began qu ite h aph az-
ar d ly (in
ter ms of nu mismatic conven-
tions and
qu ality )
and became
qu ite
u nif or m,
a f act wh ich illu str ates th e
Ptolemies'
ability
to
incor por ate
native
tr ad itions,
stand ar d ize
th em,
and u se
th e r esu lts to f u r th er th eir own eco-
nomic inter ests.
T h e f act th at
J u d ea
was
gr anted
coin-
ing pr ivileges
at all
may
itself be an im-
por tant
clu e to th e social
h istor y
of th e
th ir d
centu r y
B C E .
S tr iking
coins is a
po-
litical
act,
and some h ave
ar gu ed
th at
th e Yeh u d coins bear witness to
J u d ea's
ad ministr ative
au tonomy
and
political
ind epend ence
u nd er th e Ptolemies.
However ,
th at
explanation
is
su spect
f or sever al r easons.
Fir st,
no oth er evi-
d ence exists wh ich
su ggests
th e Ptole-
mies f avor ed
J u d ea
with
gr eater
f r eed om.
S econd ,
th e Ptolemaic Yeh u d coins stand
in a
closely - r elated
ser ies wh ich end s
u nd er
Ptolemy 11
(282- 246 B C E ). T h u s,
th e
coins
may
h ave continu ed to be str u ck
mor e
by
f or ce of iner tia th an becau se of
any special
statu s or r evised
political
str u ctu r e.
T h ir d ,
th e d enominations of
th ese coins ar e so small th at th e
pr ivilege
of
minting
th em was
r eally qu ite insig-
nif icant in th e context of th e Ptolemies'
complex monetar y policy .
T h at
th ey
exist
at all testif ies to th e Ptolemies'
th or ou gh
exploitation
of
any
native r esou r ce to
enr ich th eir own cof f er s.
How d o th ese coins
impact
th e d ebate
over th e cu ltu r al
pr ogr ess
of Hellenism
in
J u d ea d u r ing
th e th ir d
centu r y
B cE ? A
f ew nu mismatists h ave f ou nd th e Ptole-
maic
Yeh u d coins to be clear evid ence
f or th e
r apid
Hellenization of
J u d ea (Rap-
papor t 1984).
T o
be
su r e,
th e Gr eek
sy m-
bols str u ck on th ese coins ar e
qu ite
f or -
eign
to th e Hebr aic cu ltu r al tr ad ition. B u t
th ey
ar e not
f or eign
to th e establish ed
(albeit sh or t)
tr ad ition of
J u d ean coins;
d ear ly th ey
continu e nu mismatic conven-
tions establish ed in th e Per sian
per iod .
Mor eover ,
th e Hebr ew
inscr iptions
on
th ese
coins- - in
a context wh er e a Gr eek
legend
is
alway s
oth er wise
employ ed - - -
'~:;~j ~?
Find s of J ewish coins and
potter y impr es-
sions f r om th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E ar e clu ster ed
ar ou nd J er u salem. T h ese sites inth e J u d ean
h igh land s r epr esent
anenclave wh ich seems
not to h ave beenas
easily
or
qu ickly
Hellenized
as oth er
segments
of Palestine.
may
itself be concession to local
lingu is-
tic
ability .
In
su mmar y ,
th e Ptolemaic Yeh u d
coins
su ggest
th at
J u d ea
in th e th ir d cen-
tu r y
was
completely sh aped
in th e eco-
nomic
sph er e by
th e d emand s of th e new
Hellenistic over lor d s in
E gy pt.
B u t th e
coins d o not in th emselves ind icate th e
encr oach ment of Hellenistic cu ltu r al in-
f lu ence in r ealms of social inter action
bey ond
some level of
pr ivileged
com-
mer ce. If
any th ing,
th e Yeh u d coins ar e
witness to th e
vitality
of
J u d ean
tr ad itions
th at
"J u d aized "
Attic and Hellenistic
nu mismatic conventions with
appr opr i-
ate
sy mbolism
and
inscr iptions.
In ter ms of social
str u ctu r e,
th ese coins
may point
to th e
h igh pr iest's gr owing
r ole as inter national
f inancier ,
bu t
th ey
also ind icate th at in
many r espects
th er e
existed su bstantial
continu ity
between
th e Ach aemenid and Ptolemaic
r egimes.
In
gener al,
th e Ptolemaic Yeh u d coins
begin
to
paint
a
pictu r e
of an er a in wh ich
B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994) 101
Iw
T h e
loc.ations
of
ear ly
Gr eek cities and sites
wh er e Ptolemaic coins h ave beend iscover ed
d emonstr ate h ow
per vasive
was Hellenistic in-
f lu ence in th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E .
T h is d istr ibu tion
notably
exclu d es th e ar ea wh ich
r epr esents
th e
pr obable
extent of th e
pr ovince
of J u d ea.
th ir d
centu r y J u d eans
wer e
pr opelled
(especially
in th e economic
sph er e)
to-
war d a br ave new wor ld . It was a wor ld
with wh ich
th ey
h ad not
y et
come to
ter ms,
bu t cou ld no
longer ignor e.
T h e d istr ibu tion of Ptolemaic coins in
th eir Levantine
pr ovinces
can be
plotted
only pr ovisionally ,
since so f ew sites ar e
r epr esented .
Yet th e
emer ging pictu r e
sh ows concentr ations of Ptolemaic eco-
nomic
activity
center ed in sites with
d ear f inancial
ad vantage
(like
por ts
and
commer cial installations,
e.g.
T el
Mich al,
Acco, S id on,
E in
Ged i),
with
militar y
im-
por t (along
th e ef f ective nor th er n f r on-
tier of
E gy pt
at
Lach ish ,
B eth
Zu r ,
and
Ramat
Rah el, S h ech em),
or with Hellen-
istic f ou nd ation (Ammon and
S cy th opo-
lis).
Missing
ar e
any
h oar d s th at can be
attr ibu ted to th e
J u d ean
mainland - an
ar ea th at was
ar gu ably
so
r emote,
so
economically u nimpor tant,
and so mili-
tar ily
ir r elevant th at it was of little inter -
est to th e Ptolemies and th eir
agents.
Once
again,
it seems
likely
th at th ir d
centu r y J u d ea
was su r r ou nd ed
by
th e
power f u l economy
and
pr ovocative
cu l-
tu r e of Alexand er 's su ccessor s. B u t nu -
mismatic evid ence
su ggests
th at
J u d ea
pr oper
h ad not
y et
come f ace- to- f ace with
its
conqu er or s
on
any lar ge- scale
eco-
nomic, social,
or cu ltu r al level. A r eview
of Palestinian monu mental r emains
f r om th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E
su ggests
mu ch th e same.
Monu mental Remains
Most
pr eviou s ar ch aeological su r vey s
of
J u d ea
in th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E h ave
f ocu sed on th e monu mental ar ch itectu r e
of a
ver y
f ew
major
sites. In
gener al, th ey
h ave all ch ar acter ized th is
per iod
as th e
d ef initive
centu r y
of th e Hellenization
of Palestine
(Albr igh t
1949;
Ku h nen 1990).
B u t th e
ar ch aeological
r ealities
of th e
ear ly
Hellenistic
per iod
in th e Levant ar e too com-
plex
to ad mit su ch a br oad
gener alization.
At th e
ver y
least,
su ch conclu sions mu st
be
h eavily qu alif ied ;
in some
cases,
th ey
mu st be d is-
missed .
T h e
complications
of
th is
per iod
ar e
per h aps
best illu str ated
by
th e ex-
cavations at T el Dor
(Kh ir bet
el- B u r j).
B iblical
Dor ,
th e
capital
of a
major
Ph oenician settlement on
th e Levantine
coast,
com-
mand ed a sizeable
ter r i-
E
tor y th r ou gh ou t
th e
Assy r ian, B aby lon-
ian,
and Per sian
pe-
'
r iod s.
Af ter
being
*
d estr oy ed
late in th e
mid - f ou r th
centu r y
B C E ,
th e
city again began
to
pr osper
in th e Hel-
lenistic
Age. B eginning
in
1980,
excavations at Dor
u near th ed an
impor -
tant Gr eek
city
wh ose
mnlh if lf lT
r emains make an
impor tant
contr ibu tion
to th e d ebate abou t th e Hellenization of
Palestine (S tem 1985).
E xtensive Hellenistic r emains h ave
come to
ligh t
in almost
ever y
ar ea at
th e site. Dor was
appar ently occu pied
as
an u nf or tif ied
city ear ly
in th e Hellenis-
tic
per iod .
S ome time towar d th e end
of
Ptolemy II's r eign,
a
lar ge
f or tif ication
sy stem
was bu ilt. A consid er able r esi-
d ential d istr ict was in u se
th r ou gh ou t
th e Hellenistic
per iod ,
an ar ea mar ked
by
a str ict Gr eek
(Hippod amic) city
plan, r u ler - str aigh t
str eets,
and
mu ltiple
sh ops/living qu ar ter s.
A
lar ge gate
ar ea,
in u se
th r ou gh
sever al Per sian and Hel-
lenistic
ph ases, d ivu lged
a
good qu an-
tity
of mater ial r emains f r om th e th ir d
and second centu r ies. A commer cial
d y e
installation was u ncover ed in 1986. As-
T h e Hellenistic
city
of Mar isa was laid
ou t ina
gr id
of
par allel
str eets
inter secting
at
r igh t angles.
It seems
likely
th at th e
pr imar y
pr omoter s
of su ch f eatu r es of Hellenistic
cu ltu r e wer e not
ind igenou s; r ath er , Gr eek
inf lu ence
pr obably emer ged
f r om Ph oeni-
ciancolonists. (Fr om Hor owitz 1980:104.)
102 B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994)
sociated with it was a well- to- d o
pr ivate
r esid ence or
pu blic bu ild ing
wh ose
ph as-
es also
spanned
th e Per sian
per iod
and
r each ed into th e er a of Hellenistic occu -
pation
(S tem and S h ar on 1987).
T wo f ind s at Dor
possess special
r el-
evance to th e
qu estion
of th e Helleniza-
tion of Palestine
d u r ing
th e th ir d
centu r y .
T h e f ir st is th e
city
wall er ected as
par t
of a new f or tif ication
sy stem d u r ing
th e
mid to late th ir d
centu r y
B C E .3 S tem
(1988:11) id entif ied th e wall as
being
bu ilt in a
"totally
Gr eek
sty le,"
and d r ew
f r om it some
impor tant cond clu sions
abou t
th e cu ltu r al
h istor y
of Palestine: S tem
inf er r ed th at th e manif est Hellenization
at Dor wou ld h ave
by
th ir d
centu r y
B C E
f ilter ed
th r ou gh ou t S y r ia- Palestine.
A closer
ty pological stu d y
of constr u c-
tion
tech niqu es
at Dor , h owever ,
sh ows
S tem's conclu sions to h ave been stated
too
d r amatically .
For
example,
S h ar on
(1987) d emonstr ated th at Gr eek monu -
mental ar ch itectu r e came to d ominate
even th e Hellenistic
city
states of Pales-
tine
only d u r ing
th e second
centu r y
B lC E .
A second cr u cial f ind bu ttnesses th is
conclu sion. An
impor tant gr ou p
of
jar
h and les f r om Dor - th e f ir st su r e exam-
ples
of
ind igenou s
Palestinian
potter y
stamped
with Gr eek
S letter s- also
d ate f r om
N th e second
centu r y
B C E
(Ar iel et al. 1985).
Dor 's
impor tance
f or assess-
ing
th e
pr ogr ess
of Gr eek cu ltu r e
acr oss Palestine is
d ear ,
as is th e
f act th at Hellenism's cu ltu r al in-
f lu ence h ad
begu n
to establish
aitself on th e coast
by
th e mid -
th ir d
centu r y
B C E . B u t Dor
T emple 1
was an
ind epend ent
Ph oenician
city
state
wh ose geogr aph ic set-
,
ting
mad e cu ltu r al
Gate exch ange easy ,
if not inevitable. In
th is context, it seems u n-
likely
th at th e inner
J u d ean h igh land s- with
th eir limited str ategic and
economic impor tance- - -
wou ld h ave known su ch
extensive Hellenistic inf lu ence bef or e
th e mid - second
centu r y
B C E .
T h e situ ation at Dor h old s
impor tant
T h e Zenon
Papy r i
er h aps
th e most
str iking
r aw mater ial f or
r econstr u cting
J u d ean
soci-
ety
in th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E is a collection of Gr eek
papy r i
f ou nd in th e
Fay u mn
of
E gy pt
in th e late nineteenth
centu r y .
T h ese
papy r i r epr esent
th e
cor r espond ence
ar ch ive and
d epositor y
of bu siness r ecor d s of a Gr eek im-
migr ant
named Zenon wh o f u nctioned as th e ch ief ad ministr ative of f icer
f or
Apolloniu s,
th e minister of f inance (Dioketes) f or
Ptolemy
UI
Ph ilad el-
ph u s. Altogeth er ,
th e Zenon
papy r i compr ise
some
4,000
d ocu ments
wh ich
span
a
th ir ty - y ear per iod
(261- 229 B cE ). T h e ar ch ive inclu d es letter s
f r om
Apolloniu s
and h is staf f to
Zenon,
copies
of letter s f r om Zenon to
Apolloniu s,
letter s f r om
Apolloniu s
and Zenon to th eir
agents,
contr acts
of
sale,
r ecor d s of
expend itu r e,
and billets of
por t
d u es (Pestmann 1981).
Zenon ser ved
Apolloniu s
in sever al
capacities;
h e was a u sef u l and
tr u sted
manager
and
agent.
Zenon tou r ed
extensively
f or
Apolloniu s
in both
otf icial
and
pr ivate capacities, th ou gh
h is
pr imar y appointment
was as th e
ch ief
oper ating
of f icer of one of
Apolloniu s' gif t
estates (d or eai,
gif ts
f r om
Ptolemy
II) near
Ph ilad eph ia
on
newly
r eclaimed land near Lake Moer is.
Zenon
managed
th e
d ay - to- d ay
af f air s of an estate wh ose ar ea exceed ed
100 times th e nor mal
par cel
allotted to
militar y
settler s f avor ed
by
th e
king (kler ou ch oi).
His
d aily agend a
cover ed th e entir e
r ange
of concer ns:
agr icu ltu r e,
viticu ltu r e,
h u sband r y ,
r esou r ce
management,
f iscal
planning,
bu siness
str ategy .
Zenon ser ved
Apolloniou s
in th e same
capacity
as
Apol-
loniu s ser ved th e
king.
T h e Zenon
papy r i
ar e invalu able f or
u nd er stand ing
th e economic
or ga-
nization and social
h istor y
of Ptolemaic
E gy pt.
T h e d etailed
pictu r e th ey
d r aw of lif e u nd er th e Ptolemies at
Apolloniu s'
estate is
ver y impor tant,
f or
Ph ilad elph ia
is
easily
conceived as
E gy pt
in miniatu r e. T h e ad ministr ation
was h ead ed
by
Zenon wh o stood at th e h ead of a small
ar my
of of f icials,
bu siness
agents,
and sold ier s with
lar ge
h ou seh old s (oikoi) wh o f or med
th e
non- peasant
classes.
Wh ile mu ch of wh at h istor ians lear n f r om th e Zenon
papy r i
mu st be ex-
tr apolated
f r om
E gy pt
to Palestine in or d er f or it to be u sef u l in r econ-
str u cting
th e
pr ogr ess
of Hellenization in
J u d ea,
Zenon's ar ch ive also h as
some d ir ect
implications
f or th e
stu d y
of th ir d
centu r y society
in Palestine.
In 260 C E
Apolloniu s
sent Zenon on a f ou r teen- month
f act- f ind ing
tou r of
cr own and
per sonal
land s in
S y r ia,
C oele
S y r ia,
Ph oenicia, Id u mea,
and
J u d ea. B y
one cou nt,
th e Zenon ar ch ive contains
f if ty - two
d ocu ments r e-
lated to th is
jou r ney .
implications
f or th e r est of
S y r ia- Palestine
in ter ms of th e
pr ogr ess
of Hellenization.
In
gener al,
th e
h istor y
of Gr eek
occu pa-
tion in th ese land s d oes not
begin
in
any signif icant way
u ntil th e second cen-
tu r y
B C E . T h is
tempor al
f r ame of r ef er -
ence is d ear f r om f ind s at S amar ia (C r ow-
f oot et al. 1957
[1]:117f f .),
S tr aton's T ower
(Roller 1983) and sever al sites in th e
nor th er n Plain of S h ar on
(e.g.,T el
Mevor -
akh ,
Kr okod eilonpolis,
and T el
Zer or ;
see
S tem
1978;
Roller
1982;
Oh ata 1966- 70).
T h ese d ata cast d ou bt on th e
easy
as-
su mption
th at th e Hellenization of th e
Levant was
accomplish ed
in th e th ir d
centu r y
C E in a smooth
sweep
f r om th e
coast eastwar d . As a
wh ole,
th e
pr ocess
moved mu ch mor e
h aph azar d ly
and at
a somewh at slower
pace.
T h e cu ltu r al and ar ch itectu r al
h istor y
of Dor also illu str ates h ow th e Helleni-
zation of th e Levant
pr oceed ed
accor d -
ing
to economic and
militar y str ategy ,
not cu ltu r al self - awar eness. Dor was
B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994) 103
over r u n with Hellenes becau se it was a
key
coastal
entr y point
to th e
pr ovinces
f or an
aggr essive
Ptolemaic
economy .
Like
wise,
ear ly
Gr eek inland settlements
wer e establish ed or
r evamped
to meet
th e need of
pr od u ction (e.g.
T el
Anaf a,
B eer sh eba,
and
E in
Ged i;
see
Weinber g
1971;
Der f ler
1981;
Kash er 1982) or
pr otec-
tion
(e.g.
B eth Zu r and
S amar ia;
see S ell-
ar s et al.
1968;
T oombs and
Wr igh t 1961).
Finally ,
th e
d iver sity
of th e ar ch aeo-
logical
r ecor d at Dor
points
towar d th e
f act th at Hellenistic
S y r ia- Palestine
was
mar ked
by
a
var iety
of cu ltu r es wh ich
lived
togeth er
(with var iou s
d egr ees
of
inter action) in
ver y
close
geogr aph ical
pr oximity .
Ou tsid e th e conf ines of "Hel-
lenistic Dor "
lay
civilizations
essentially
u naf f ected
by
Hellenism in th e th ir d
centu r y .
T h is f act h as
impor tant impli-
cations f or
u nd er stand ing
th e
pr ogr ess
Zenon's
jou r ney th r ou gh
Palestine inth e
mid - th ir d
centu r y
B C E
pr eser ved
a wealth of in-
f or mationabou t th e
economy
and
society
of
th e
ear ly
Hellenistic er a. T h e extent of h is tr av-
els sh ows h ow
qu ickly
th e Ptolemies took ad -
vantage
of th e economic
potential
of th eir
possessions.
T h ese
stor age
jar
h and les
f r om Hellenistic
Dor ar e th e ear li-
est knownexam-
ples
of Palestinian
potter y stamped
with Gr eek letter s.
S tr atigr aph ic
evi-
d ence d ates
th ese f ind s to ca.
130 B C E , a f u ll
centu r y
af ter
many
h ave ar -
gu ed
f or a th or -
ou gh going
Hell-
enizationof th e
Levant. (Fr om Ar iel
et al.
1985:137f .)
of Hellenization in
J u d ea
d u r ing
th e
th ir d
centu r y
B C E .
T o cite
ju st
one
example,
th e town
of Mar isa (T ell S and abannah )- with
its
Gr eek
lay ou t
and Alexand r ian tomb
paintings- lay ju st
some 40 kilometer s
sou th west of
J er u salem.
B u t in th e
ear ly
Hellenistic
per iod , J er u salem
and Mar isa
may
h ave
stood - cu ltu r ally speaking-
wor ld s
apar t.
Mar isa
was,
af ter
all,
a
S id onian
colony
establish ed
by
th e Ptol-
emies. It
lay
in
ter r itor y f ir mly
contr olled
by
th e Id u means- no r eal f r iend s of th e
J ews (2 Macc 12:35). Mor eover ,
r ecent
stu d y
h as sh own th e Gr eek f eatu r es of
Mar isa to h ave been limited in nu mber
and
"poor ly
execu ted and obviou s-
ly ver y pr ovincial
wor k" (Hor o-
witz
1980:111).F
In
su mmar y ,
th e evid ence
pr o-
vid ed
by
monu mental ar ch itec-
tu r e
points
towar d th e conclu sion
th at th e
J u d ean
h ear tland was
lar gely
u naf f ected
by
th e
ear ly
Hel-
lenistic inf lu ences wh ich h ad
begu n
to
ch ange
th e f ace of th e Levant in
th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E .
T r u ly signif i-
cant Gr eek inf lu ence is d iscer nible
only
wh er e Ptolemaic
militar y
and economic
inter ests ar e
clear ly
manif est.
Miscellaneou s mater ial ar tif acts
T wo ind ivid u al f ind s (or
gr ou ps
of f ind s)
f r om th ir d
centu r y
B C E Palestine ar e es-
pecially signif icant
f or
u nd er stand ing
th e
pr ocess
of Hellenization in
S y r ia- Pales-
tine. T h e f ir st is a
bilingu al
ostr acon
C ou r t
=
a s
Mar isa
(T ell S and abannah ) is of tencited as
evid ence f or th e
r apid
Hellenizationof Pales-
tine. Mar isa's
town- planning
and ar ch itectu r e
sh ow some Gr eek inf lu ence. Yet onth e wh ole,
th e
city
h ad f ew Hellenistic elements. For exam-
ple,
h ou se
plans
f r om Hellenistic Mar isa
(above)
and B r onze
Age Meggid o
illu str ate th e conti-
nu ity
of easter ntr ad itions and lack of Hellenis-
tic innovation. Neith er ar e
many
of th e
ty pical
Gr eek
pu blic bu ild ings
to be f ou nd at Mar isa.
(Fr om Hor owitz 1980:108.)
104 B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994)
p
w
95b
t')
o1
/
r l
kAi Y Xf 1
1' Hr r ~woC ~
T h e ear liest known Gr eek
inscr iption
in
Palestine was f ou nd in1971 at Kh ir bet el- K6m,
a Gr eek
militar y
installationsou th of J u d ea.
Dated to th e
y ear
277
B C E ,
it r ecor d s a commer -
cial tr ansactionbetweenanId u meanbanker and
a Gr eek bu sinessman. (Fr om Ger aty 1975:56.)
f ou nd in 1971
d u r ing
a
salvage
excava-
tion at Kh ir bet
el- Q6m,
a small site be-
tween Hebr on and Lach ish abou t 50
kilometer s sou th west of
J er u salem.
T h e
ostr acon,
r ecor d ing
a loan between an
Id u mean commer cial
f igu r e (kos- y ad a')
and h is Gr eek bu siness
par tner (Niker -
atos),
d ates
specif ically
to
y ear
6 of th e
r eign
of
Ptolemy
II
(277 B C E ).
Its text in-
clu d es a S emitic tr ansliter ation of th e
Gr eek tech nical ter m
kapelos (pr obably
"money lend er "
in th is
context).
T h is f ind
th u s
r epr esents
"th e ear liest attested
Palestinian Gr eek
inscr iption...and per -
h aps
th e f ir st
bilingu al
ostr acon f r om
Palestine in
any langu age" (Ger aty
1975:57).
Fr om th is
ostr acon,
some sch olar s
h ave inf er r ed th at th e Hellenization of
Palestine was f ar ad vanced
by
th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E . B u t th at conclu sion is valid
only
insof ar as it
r eally
means th at d u r -
ing
th e
ear ly
th ir d
centu r y
B C E ,
some
socioeconomic
components
of th e var i-
ou s eth nic
gr ou ps making
th eir h ome
in Palestine wer e
capable
of su ch f inan-
cial inter cou r se with th e Gr eek wor ld .
Fr om su ch limited evid ence it is u nwise
to make br oad
gener alizations
abou t
th e wh ole of
J u d ean society .
Kh ir bet el-
Q6m
was a Gr eek
militar y
installation
establish ed
ju st
af ter th e Hellenistic con-
qu est
of th e
Levant,
not an
ind igenou s
settlement. And th e Kh ir bet
el- Q6m
in-
scr iptions
ar e
d ear ly
wr itten in a d ialect
wh ich id entif ies th eir au th or as an
E d omite/Id u mean.
T h e second
impor tant
ar tif act in th is
d iscu ssion is two
gr ou ps
of
stamped jar
h and les f r om
J u d ea
wh ich Pau l
Lapp
(1963)
d ated to th e mid - th ir d
centu r y 1B C E .
T h e f ir st
gr ou p
of h and les wer e
stamped
with th e
paleo- Hebr ew inscr iption
YHD
and inscr ibed with var iou s
sy mbols
th at seem to ind icate an of f icial
gover n-
ment seal. Most of th e h and les wer e
f ou nd in th e
J er u salem
ar ea
(twenty - two
f r om
Oph el
with th r ee oth er s f r om th e
T y r opoean V alley ), th ou gh examples
ar e
also known f r om
Gezer ,
B eth any ,
and
Ramat Rah el.
T h e second
gr ou p
of h and les wer e
impr essed
with a cir cu lar seal wh ich
consisted of a
f ive- pointed
star
(th e
tr a-
d itional
sy mbol
of th e
h igh pr iest)
be-
tween wh ose axes wer e inscr ibed th e
letter s YRS LM
(J er u salem).
Of th is
ty pe,
f or ty - f ou r examples
ar e known.
Lapp
postu lated
th at th ese
jar
h and les ar e a
r emnant of a d u al
sy stem
of tax collection:
th e "YHD
plu s sy mbol"
h and les ind i-
cating gover nment owner sh ip
of collect-
ed taxes in
kind ,
and th e YRS LM h an-
d les
ind icating temple
taxes f or th e
h igh pr iest.4
T h e
jar
h and les wh ich
Lapp
d iscu ssed
ar e with ou t a d ou bt some of th e most
impor tant
evid ence available f or r econ-
str u cting
th e social and
political
timbr e
of
ear ly
Hellenistic
J u d ea. T h ey cer tainly
seem to bear th e
stamp
of of f icial
u se,
and
Lapp's gener al explanation
of th eir
ch ar acter
(as par t
of a centr alized tax
Religion
in T h ir d
C entu r y
B C E
J u d ea
Der h aps
th e most
impor tant
institu tions of Ptolemaic J u d ea wer e th e
tem-
ple
and its
pr iesth ood .
T h e
J er u salem temple
was noted as th e
pr eemi-
nent f eatu r e of
ear ly
Hellenistic
J u d aism by
th e Gr eek wr iter Hecataeu s of
Abd er a. Hecataeu s tr aced th e
key
elements of
J ewish r eligion
and
society
back to
Moses,
among
wh ose
accomplish ments
Hecataeu s listed f ir st th e
f ou nd ing
of th e
T emple
("wh ich [th e J ews]
h old in
h igh est h onor ")
and th e
intr od u ction of '"h onor s and r itu als
paid
to
[th e J ewish ] god ."
Hecataeu s also
r ecognized
Moses as
h aving
been
r esponsible
f or
f ou nd ing
th e
pr iesth ood .
Alth ou gh
Hecataeu s'
r epor t
was no d ou bt inf lu enced
by
Gr eek
expec-
tations and h is own
liter ar y agend a,
h is basic
eth nogr aph y emph asizing
th e
impor tance
of th e
pr iestly
establish ment can be cor r obor ated . T h e
T emple
and
J er u salemite pr iesth ood
ar e centr al both to th e
r ou gh ly
con-
tempor ar y f r agments
of Pseu d oHecataeu s On th e
J ews pr eser ved by J ose-
ph u s
(C .
AP.
2,42- 43)
and to th e S eleu cid C h ar ter of
J er u salem (J oseph u s
Ant.
12,140f f .; 145f .).
T h e most
impor tant politico- r eligiou s f igu r e
of
ear ly
Hellenistic
J u d ean
society
was
u nd ou bted ly
th e
h igh pr iest Accor d ing
to
Hecataeu s,
...th e
J ews
h ave never h ad a
king,
bu t th e
lead er sh ip
of th e mass of th e
people
is
alway s
vested in th e
pr iest
wh o
appear s
to excel in wisd om and
vir tu e.
T h ey
call h im th e
High
Pr iest,
and believe h im to be th e med iator
of God 's command s to th em....
[lit
is h e wh o in th eir assemblies and
th eir oth er
meetings pr oclaims
wh at is to be
or d ained ,
and th e
J ews
ar e so
obed ient in su ch matter s th at
th ey immed iately
f all to th e
gr ou nd
and d o
obeisance to th e
High
Pr iest wh o
expou nd s
th ese command s to th em.
Hecataeu s h as
inter pr eted many aspects
of wh at h e saw in
J er u salem
in a
way
wh ich su ited h is own
pr econceptions
and
f u ir th er ed
h is own lit-
er ar y
and
political pu r poses.
B u t,
in
gener al,
Hecataeu s
f aith f u lly pr esents
th e social
r eality
of th e
wealth y
and
power f u l
institu tion wh ich continu ed
to
play
a
key
r ole in
J ewish
lif e
th r ou gh
th e S econd
T emple per iod .
B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994) 105
S tor age jar s
wh ich J u d eanau th or ities
pr obably
u sed to collect taxes wer e
stamped
with
impr essions
like th ese inth e th ir d
centu r y
B C E .
T h e
impr essions r epr esent
a kind of of f icial seal
wh ich ind icated
owner sh ip. S ignif icantly ,
th e
sy mbols
and letter s ar e
th or ou gh ly gr ou nd ed
inHebr ew- not Gr eek- tr ad itions.
(Fr om Lapp 1963:25.)
collection
sy stem)
is
pr obably
on
tar get.
E ven
th ou gh Lapp
went too f ar in some
aspects
of h is
th eor izing,
th ese h and les
point d ear ly
to th e
ver y
tr ad itional ch ar -
acter of of f icial
sy mbols
in wh at
many
h ave
su pposed
to be a
r ampantly
Hel-
lenistic er a.
S u mmar y
and conclu sions
T h e
over wh elming patter n
of evid ence
wh ich
emer ges
f r om th is r eview ind i-
cates th at th er e is
r eally ver y
little ar ch ae-
ological su ppor t
f or th e contention th at
J u d ea
was
th or ou gh ly
Hellenized be-
f or e th e mid d le of th e second
centu r y
B cE .
Neith er monu mental ar ch itectu r e nor
mater ial cu ltu r e h as been u ncover ed to
su ggest
th at Gr eek cu ltu r e was an
impor -
tant
par t
of
J u d ean society d u r ing
th e
th ir d
centu r y
B C E .
Wh ile th is
aspect
of th e case
against
ear ly
Hellenization is
lar gely
an
ar gu ment
f r om
silence,
su ch an
analy sis
is
str ength -
ened
by
th e f act th at Hellenistic con-
str u ction
tech ntiqu es
d o not seem to h ave
been
wid ely
d isseminated in Palestine
bef or e th e second
centu r y
B C E . It was not
f or a h u nd r ed
y ear s
th at th e most
impor -
tant
ph ases
of Gr eek
occu pation
occu r -
r ed at almost
ever y
Palestinian site.
T h is conclu sion is not to
imply ,
h ow-
ever ,
th at a th ir d
centu r y J u d ean
wou ld
h ave been
completely ignor ant
of th e
Hellenistic
pr esence
in
C oele- S y r ia
and
Ph oenicia. On th e
contr ar y ,
th e
emer g-
ing pictu r e
of th is er a's br oad er wor ld
sh ows it to h ave been su r r ou nd ed on
all sid es
by
th e f ir st wave of Ptolemaic
settlements.
J u d ea
was
pr actically
en-
cir cled
by
th e
str ong militar y
and social
pr esence
of Hellenism th at was becom-
ing
entr ench ed in th e coastal
plain
to
th e
west,
in Id u mea to th e
sou th ,
in S am-
ar ia to th e
nor th ,
and in th e
T r ansjor d an
to th e east. In th e
ear ly
Hellenistic
per iod ,
J u d ea
was
cer tainly
a
r ecognized
ad min-
istr ative
entity
wh ose
self - id entity
was
clear - even if its r eal
political au tonomy
was
sh ar ply
limited . It is not u nr eason-
able to
su ggest
th at
J u d ea
encou nter ed
Hellenism on a d if f er ent timetable th an
its
neigh bor ing
cu ltu r es. One of th e f ew
h istor ical witnesses of th e
J ews
in th e
ear ly
Hellenistic
per iod
ch ar acter ized
th eir
way
of lif e as
being
"u nsociable
and h ostile to
f or eigner s" (Hecataeu s
of
Abd er a,
as cited
by
Diod or u s
xl, 3).
T h u s,
th ir d
centu r y J u d eans
stood on
th e
cu sp
of a
pr ocess
of Hellenization
wh ich was
eventu ally
consu mmated in
th e events
su r r ou nd ing
th e Hasmonean
r evolt. Almost th e entir e th ir d
centu r y
wou ld
pass
bef or e th e cu ltu r al climate in
J u d ea
wou ld
su ppor t any
su stained em-
br ace of Gr eek id eas.
C er tainly
th er e
wou ld h ave been some astu te obser ver s
wh o wou ld not h ave been insensitive
to th e new wind th at was
blowing
all
ar ou nd . It is
possible,
f or
example,
th at
a h u nd r ed
y ear s
bef or e th e
Maccabees,
th e biblical wr iter
Qoh eleth
anticipated
an
impend ing
cr isis of f aith
engend er ed
by
th e Hellenistic cu ltu r e th at was en-
compassing J u d ea.
Yet th ir d
centu r y J u d eans
wer e al-
r ead y becoming qu ite
f amiliar with th e
Hellenistic wor ld in two ar eas:
gover n-
ment and economics. T h e
ar ch aeological
r ecor d of th ir d
centu r y
B C E Palestine in-
d icates th at
J u d ea
h ad been
integr ated
into th e Ptolemaic
economy qu ite ear ly
in th e Hellenistic
per iod .
T h at
integr a-
tion is
u nqu estionably
r ef lected in th e
per iod 's
tax collection
sy stem
as well a!
its of f icial and
pr ovincial coinage. J er u -
salem,
owing per h aps
to its r elative mili-
tar y u nimpor tance, escaped
th e f ate of
being
settled as a Ptolemaic
d er u ch y .
B u l
in ter ms of economic
d omination,
th e
J u d ean capital
was no less r u led
by
Alex-
and r ia th an if it h ad been u nd er th e com-
mand of a local
militar y gover nor .
E conomy
and
S ociety
in T h ir d
C entu r y
B C E
J u d ea
h e
socio- economic
analogy
between
E gy pt
and Palestine is
qu ite str ong
S in th e
ear ly
Hellenistic
per iod .
T h e Ptolemies
qu ickly
and
skillf u lly
in-
cor por ated
th eir Levantine ter r itor ies into th eir
empir e, establish ing
an id en-
tical
sy stem
of land tenu r e and ad ministr ative
appar atu s.
T h e Hellenistic
E gy ptians
took
th or ou gh
contr ol of th e
r egion's economy
and
imposed
ex-
h au stive
r egu lations
wh ich d id not d if f er
su bstantially
f r om th ose in
place
along
th e Nile. With in d ecad es of th eir
conqu est,
th e Ptolemies over r an
S y r ia-
Palestine with th eir mer cenar ies- both
militar y
and commer cial.
T o be su r e, th er e wer e
signif icant
d if f er ences between Palestine and
E gy pt.
Never th eless,
a
good
case can be bu ilt f or th e view th at, at least in econom-
ic
ter ms, J u d ea
was "a little
E gy pt."
T h e Gr eek commer cial and ad minis-
tr ative
spir it
seems to h ave been alive and well
th r ou gh ou t
Palestine,
ad apt-
ing
itself to local cond itions wh er e
necessar y . Again,
th e Zenon
papy r i
ar e
pr imar y
evid ence wh ich sh ows th e
d egr ee
to wh ich th e
E gy ptian
Hel-
lenists h ad establish ed mer cantile r elations in th eir Levantine
possessions.
T h ir d centu r y
J u d ea
was a
par t
of th e Ptolemies'
r oy al
estate,
and as su ch
its ad ministr ation d id not d if f er
signif icantly
f r om th e
E gy ptians'
h ome
ter r itor ies. Zenon h imself
may
h ave h eld a
qu asi- of f icial position
as
comp-
tr oller of Palestinian land s.
106 B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994)
S till,
f or eign
economic d omination
and
imposed political su per str u ctu r es
ar e
necessar y
bu t not su f f icient cond itions
f or th e
emer gence
of social str u ctu r es
and cu ltu r al id eas. Wh ile th e
ar ch aeolog-
ical r ecor d valid ates th e Ptolemies' in-
r oad s into th ir d
centu r y J u d ea
in some
impor tant aspects
of social
existence,
th e witness of
coins, str u ctu r es,
and ar -
tif acts f r om
"E ar ly
Hellenistic
J u d ea"
sh ows th at Hellenization was an u n-
even
pr ocess
wh ich h ad not
begu n sig-
nif icantly
to af f ect th e basic
composi-
tion of
J u d ean society .
In th e th ir d
centu r y
B C E
J u d ea
was
ind eed th r eatened
by
th e
ever - ad vancing
tid e of Hellenism th at f lood ed th e Near
E ast in Alexand er 's wake. B u t Hellen-
ism's ad vance was not a u nif or m tid al
wave th at
swept
th e wh ole of th e Or i-
ent bef or e it in a
clear ly - d ef ined pr o-
gr ession
f r om west to east. Rath er , Hel-
lenistic inf lu ence swir led in
pools
and
collected in ed d ies th at f lowed ar ou nd
mu ch of th e
ter r itor y
wh ose
only
su b-
stantial link with th e r eal Gr eek wor ld
was th e economic
r elationsh ip
between
ind igenou s
lead er s,
mer ch ants,
and
peas-
ants and th eir
f or eign
over lor d s. T h e
ar ch aeological
r ecor d
d epicts
th ir d cen-
tu r y
B C E
J u d ea
as
r elatively d r y gr ou nd ;
its inu nd ation
lay
almost a
centu r y
in
th e f u tu r e.
Hellenistic S emites in th e Zenon
Papy r i
etly
wh at d id it mean f or a
J ew
to be Heilenized in th e
ear ly
Ptole-
cper iod ?
One answer comes f r om a letter sent f r om
S y r ia
in 256/
255 wC E to Zenon
by
an u nknown non- r eek
(per h aps
an Ar ab named
[ ]Nab) (P. C ol. Z.
66). In th is d ocu ment, a f or mer su bor d inate of Zenon's
complains
abou t th e sh or t sh r if t h e h ad been
given by
th e f u nctionar ies
to wh ose ser vice Zenon h ad r ecommend ed h im. T h e man
ch ar ges
th at th e
base tr eatment h e h as r eceived f r om var iou s of f icials is attr ibu table to th e
f act th at h e is "bar bar ian" wh o d oes not know h ow to h ellenizein.
Alth ou gh
some
contr over sy
h as attach ed itself to th e
inter pr etation
of
th is
key
ter m,
its most
str aigh tf or war d meaning
is th at th e maltr eated au -
th or of th e letter was u nable to
speak
Gr eek
(Au stin 1981:418).
T h u s P. C ol.
Z. 66
d epicts
a native S emite wh o h ad been
intimately
involved in th e
economic af f air s of a
h igh ly placed
Ptolemaic
of f icial,
and
y et
h e r emained
exclu d ed
f r om th e cu ltu r al and social lif e of Hellenism at its most f u nd a-
mental level becau se h e h ad not master ed its
langu age.
T h is
anony mou s cor r espond ent pr ovid es
a mod el of wh at it meant to be
"h ellenized " in th ir d
centu r y
B C E Palestine. Like
h im, J u d eans
of th e th ir d
centu r y
B E
h ad lear ned to d eal with th e Gr eek economic inf r astnu ctu r e of
th eir
age.
S ome of
th em,
eager
f or social and f inancial
ad vancement,
may
even h ave been
bilingu al
to th e
d egr ee
th at
th ey
cou ld conver se
minimally
and cond u ct bu siness with th e au th or ities. B u t
th ey
wer e Hellenists in
qu ite
a limited sense th at f ocu sed
only
on th eir essential need to inter act with th e
Gr eeks in of f icial and economic cir cu mstances. It wou ld take anoth er th r ee
gener ations
bef or e Hellenism moved
bey ond
th ese basic
sph er es
of activi-
ty
to inf lu ence
signif icantly soph isticated
cu ltu r al
u nd er stand ings
and
key
social institu tions wh ich ar e
u su ally
listed as th e
d ef ining
ch ar acter istics of
Hellenistic
J u d aism.
Notes
1 Hengel's J u d aism
and Hellenism is
someth ing
of an
exception,
since h e d id inclu d e a
var iety
of
ar ch aeological
mater ial.
However ,
Hengel's
d ata su f f er ed inth e end f r om a nu mber of
sh or tcomings,
th e most
impor tant
of wh ich was
h is u ncr itical
levelling
of Hellenized Palestine
into a
single h omogenou s geogr aph ical
and
social
entity .
2
Inar ch aeological ter ms, Hellenizationcon-
sists of Gr eek inf lu ence wh ich is d emonstr able
in
(1)
r ecor d s of th e of f icial
(coins)
and
popu -
lar
(inscr iptions, bilingu al
texts, etc.)
u ses of
langu age; (2)
monu mental r emains and civil
engineer ing; (3)
ar tistic
wor ks; (4)
th e d etr itu s
of
ever y d ay
lif e
(potter y , weigh ts, etc.).
Wh er e
Hellenism h as mad e inr oad s inmater ial
cu l-
tu r e,
Hellenistic inf lu ence insocial and intel-
lectu al lif e canbe assu med as a
logical
cor ol-
lar y
If
any th ing,
th e
ph y sical
accou tr ements of
Hellenistic lif e
gener ally pr eced ed
its ad vance
inth e wor ld of id eas.
3
T h e wall was constr u cted of sand stone blocks
laid h ead er s ou t. T h is two meter th ick wall r an
ina
str aigh t
line ar ou nd th e
pr eviou s
f ou r th
centu r y
str u ctu r es and f or tif ications.
S qu ar e
tower s, set at 30- 45 meter
inter vals,
pr ojected
ar ou nd th e wall. Its d ate was establish ed
by
a
coinof
Ptolemy
II over wh ich it was
set; liter -
ar y
evid ence cor r obor ates th e f or t's
comple-
tion
by
219 B C E
(Poly biu s Histor y
5:66; J ose-
ph u s,
Ant.
12, 2, 23).
4
Onth e basis of th ese two h and le
gr ou ps,
along
with oth er
liter ar y
evid ence,
Lapp
ar -
gu ed
th at Ptolemaic Palestine was not a semi-
au tonomou s temple state inwh ich th e h igh
pr iest
f u nctioned as anover seer f or th e
E gy pt-
ian
monar ch ;
r ath er , h e saw th e two
separ ate
tax collection
sy stems
as ind ications of wh at
h e d escr ibed as a d ivisionof
power
between
civil and
r eligiou s
au th or ities,
a
patter n
of
J u d eanpolitical
lif e th at went back to th e
ear ly
Per sian
per iod
wh enth e
d y ar ch y
was f ir st
cr eated . He went onto
postu late
th at
J u d ea
was ad minister ed inth e Ptolemaic er a
by
a
J ewish gover nor - wh ose
pr imar y r esponsibil-
ity
inth e centr alized Ptolemaic
bu r eau cr acy
was th e collectionof taxes. Oth er mater ials in-
d icate th at h is
su ppositions
abou t th e natu r e
of
J u d ea's political
ad ministr ationar e mistak-
en. Inth e
ear ly
Hellenistic
per iod
th er e is no
evid ence th at
J u d ea
was anau tonomou s
pr ovince
with its own
ind igenou s gover nor .
B ibliogr aph y
Albr igh t, WF.
1949 T h e
Ar ch aeology of
Palestine. B altimor e:
Pengu in
B ooks.
Ar iel, D.T . et al.
1985 A
Gr ou p
of
S tamped
Hellenistic S tor -
age J ar
Hand les f r om Dor . Isr ael E x-
plor ationJ ou r nal
35:135- 52.
Au stin,
M.M.
1981 T h e Hellenistic Wor ld
f r om
Alexand er to
th e Roman
C onqu est. C ambr id ge:
C ambr id ge Univer sity
Pr ess.
B r au n,
R.
1979
Qoh eleth
u nd d ie
f r zih h ellenistisch e Pop-
u lar - ph ilosoph ie.
B ZAW 130.
B er lin,
New Yor k: Walter d e
Gr u y ter .
C r ensh aw, J .L.
1987 E cclesiastes. Old T estament
Libr ar y .
Ph ilad eph ia:
Westminster Pr ess.
C r owf oot,
J .W.
et al.
1957 S amar ia- S ebaste:
Repor ts of
th e
E xped i-
B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994) 107
Dr [
Rober t Har r ison is
ad ju nct f acu lty
at
V ir ginian
T h eological S eminar y
in Alex-
and r ia,
V ir ginia,
wh er e h e teach es bibli-
cal
langu ages
and New T estament. Har -
r ison h old s a Ph .D. in Hebr ew B ible and
J u d aic
S tu d ies f r om Du ke
Univer sity .
A
Pr iest in
th e
E piscopal
Diocese of Wash -
ington,
DC ,
h e
cu r r ently
ser ves as Assis-
tant Rector of S t.
J oh n's E piscopal
C h u r ch ,
C h evy
C h ase,
Mar y land .
tionin1931- 33 and
of
th e B r itish
E xpe-
d itionin1935. 3 V ols. Lond on: Pales-
tine
E xplor ation
Fu nd .
C r u semann,
E
1984 T h e
Unch angeable
Wor ld : T h e 'C r isis
of Wisd om' in Koh eleth .
Pp.
57- 77 in
T h e God
of
th e
Lowly .
E d ited
by
W.
S ch ottr of f and W.
S tegemann.
T r ans-
lated
by M.J .
O'C onnell.
Mar y knoll,
New Yor k: Or bis B ooks.
Ger aty ,
L.W.
1975 T h e Kh ir bet
el- Q6m B ilingu al
Ostr a-
con. B u lletin
of
th e Amer icanS ch ools
of
Or iental Resear ch 220:56- 61.
Har r ison,
C .R.
1991
Qoh eleth
inS ocial- Histor ical
Per spec-
tive. Ph .D.
d isser tation,
Du ke Univer -
sity .
Hengel,
M.
1974 Hellenism and
J u d aism.
2 V ols. T r ans-
lated
by J .
B owd en.
Ph ilad elph ia:
For tr ess Pr ess.
Hor owitz, G.
1980 T own
Planning
of Hellenistic Mar isa:
A
Reappr aisal
of th e E xcavations
Af ter
E igh ty
Year s. Palestine
E xplo-
r ation
Qu ar ter ly
112:93- 111.
Kash er , A.
1982 Gaza
Du r ing
th e Gr aeco- RomanE r a.
J er u salem
C ath ed r a 2:68- 70.
Ku h nen,
H.- P
1990 Palatina in
gr iech e- r omisch en
Zeit.
B er lin: C .H. B eck.
Lapp,
P.W.
1963 Ptolemaic
S tamped
Hand les f r om
J u d ah .
B u lletin
of
th e Amer icanS ch ools
of
Or iental Resear ch 172:22- 35.
Loh f ink,
N.
1980 Koh eleth . Die Neu e E ch ter B ibel.
S tu ttgar t:
E ch ter
V er lag.
Lor etz,
O.
1964
Qoh elet
u nd d er alte Or ient: Unter -
su ch u ng
zu r S til u nd
th eologisch er
T h e-
matik d es B u ch es
Qoh elet. Fr iebu r g,
B asel,
Wein: Her d er .
Mesh or er ,
Y
1982 Ancient
J ewish C oinage.
2 V ols. Dix
Hills,
New Yor k:
Amph or a
B ooks.
Mild enber g,
L.
1978 Yeh u d : A
Pr eliminar y S tu d y
of th e Pr o-
vincial
C oinage
of
J u d ea. Pp.
183- 96
inGr eek Nu mismatics and
Ar ch aeology :
E ssay s
inHonor
of Mar gar et T h ompson,
E d ited
by O.
Mor kh olm and N.M.
Waggoner .
Wettem: C u ltu r a Pr ess.
Oh ata,
K.
1966- 70 T el Zer or .
T oky o: S ociety
f or Near
E astemr n
S tu d ies in
J apan.
Pestmann,
PW.
1981 A Gu id e to th e Zenon
Papy r i. Papy r o-
logica Lu gu nd o- B atava
21 AB . Lei-
d en:
E .J .
B r ill.
Peter s, J .P.
and
T h ier sch ,
H.
1905 Painted T ombs inth e
Necr opolis of
Mar isa. Lond on: Palestine
E xplo-
r ationFu nd .
Rappapor t,
U.
1984 T h e Fir st
J u d eanC oinage. J ou r nal f or
J ewish
S tu d ies 32:1- 17.
Roller ,
D.W
1982 T h e Noth em Plains of S h ar oninth e
Hellenistic Per iod . B u lletin
of
th e
Amer icanS ch ools
of
Or iental Resear ch
247:43- 52.
S ellar s, O.R. et al.
1968 T h e 1957 E xcavations at B eth Zu r . An-
nu al of th e Amer icanS ch ools of Or i-
ental Resear ch 38.
C ambr id ge:
Amer -
icanS ch ools of Or iental Resear ch .
S h ar on,
I.
1987 Ph oenicianand Gr eek Ash lar C on-
str u ction
T ech niqu es
at T el
Dor ,
Is-
r ael. B u lletin
of
th e Amer icanS ch ools
of
Or iental Resear ch 267:21- 42.
S tem,
E .
1978 E xcavations at T el Mevor akh .
Qed em
9.
J er u salem:
Hebr ew
Univer sity
Insti-
tu te of
Ar ch aeology .
1985 T h e E xcavations at T el Dor .
Pp.
169-
92 inT h e Land
of
Isr ael: C r ossr oad s
of
C ivilizations., E d ited
by
E .
Lipinski.
Or ientalia Lou vaniensia Analectica 19.
Leu ven:
V itgever is
Peeter s.
1988 T h e Walls of Dor . Isr ael
E xplor ation
J ou r nal
37:201- 11.
T oombs,
L.E . and
Wr igh t,
G.E .
1961 T h e T h ir d
C ampaign
at B alatah
(S h ech -
em).
B u lletin
of
th e Amer icanS ch ools
of
Or iental Resear ch 161:1144.
Weinber g,
S .S .
1971 T el Anaf a: T h e Hellenistic T own. Is-
r ael
E xplor ation J ou r nal
21:86- 101.
1981 A T er r acotta
Figu r ine
f r om th e Hel-
lenistic
T emple
at T el B eer - sh eba. Is-
r ael
E xplor ation J ou r nal
31:97- 99.
Hellenism and B iblical T exts:
T h e Pr oblem of
Qoh eleth
V er y
ear ly
in th e
h istor y
of biblical cr iticism sch olar s id entif ied similar -
ities between
Qoh eleth (E cclesiastes)
and a
var iety
of Gr eek wr iter s
(Zir kel 1792).
Mod em cr itics h ave continu ed to
d evelop
th e id ea th at
Qoh el-
eth 's wor ld view and
liter ar y ar tistr y
wer e
lar gely d epend ent
on Gr eek
anteced ents
(B r au n 1973;
Loh f ink
1980).
Oth er sch olar s contend th at
Qoh el-
eth
betr ay s
little if
any
Hellenistic inf lu ence
(Zimmer li 1962;
Lor etz
1964).
S ince th e consensu s d ate f or
Qoh eleth 's
wor k lies
f ir mlny
in th e th ir d cen-
tu r y
B C E
(C r ensh aw 1987),
th is d ebate is of some
consequ ence
to th e
qu es-
tion of th e extent of Hellenization in
ear ly
Ptolemaic
J u d ea.
T h is vener able d iscu ssion of Hellenistic inf lu ence in
Qoh eleth
h as been
car r ied on
solely
in
liter ar y categor ies.
Mor e
r ecently ,
sch olar s h ave
begu n
to examine h ow th e social,
political,
and economic
ch anges wr ou gh t by
th e Ptolemaic
conqu est
of
S y r ia- Palestine may
h ave inf lu enced
Qoh eleth 's
u nd er stand ing
of th e wor ld and h is f or ms of
expr ession (C r u semann
1984).
It now
may
be
possible
to f ind
impor tant
connections between th e
ch anging
social cir cu mstances of th ir d
centu r y J u d ea
and
Qoh eleth 's
pes-
simistic ou tlook and
epicu r ean ph ilosoph y (Har r ison 1991).
108 B iblical
Ar ch aeologist
57:2 (1994)