Sárospataki Füzetek 17. (2013)
2013 / 1-2. szám - TANULMÁNYOK - Doedens, Jacob J. T.:Ókori izraelita politeista feliratok: Aséra mint JHVH felesége?
2. Kuntillet 1 Aj rúd At Kuntillet 'Ajrud,14 * * * * 19 a site was uncovered consisting of two buildings. The building at the east side is poorly preserved, the main building at the west side forms a rectangle of 25x15 m. and was built around a courtyard. From the presence of the remains of two staircases it can be extrapolated that the building may have had a storey.20 The original function of the buildings is still subject of discussion. According to several scholars the finds are the remains of a caravanserai,21 Zevit argues that the purpose of the whole complex was a cultic one.22 A C14 dating of organic samples found at Ajrud yields dates from 830 to 750 b.c.e.23 In the remains of the main building several inscriptions and decorations were found on wall plaster and on two large storage jars, so-called pithoi. 2.1 The Plaster Inscriptions Near the entrance of the main building of Kuntillet Ajrud, fragments of three inscriptions written in ‘Phoenician’24 script on plaster were found. Only two of them could be partially reconstructed.25 14 The site was uncovered in 1975—76 and is located 50 km. south of Kadesh Barnea, cf. Keel and Uehlinger, Gods, Goddesses, 210-236; Zevit, The Religions of Ancient Israel, 359-370. Kuntillet ‘Ajrud is a one-period site, therefore it contains no contamination with artifacts from other strata. Cf. David Noel Freedman, “Yahweh of Samaria and His Asherah,” BA 50 no. 4 (1987): 246. 20 Cf. Zevit, The Religions of Ancient Israel, 370; Judith M. Hadley, “Some Drawings and Inscriptions on Two Pithoi from Kuntillet Ajrud,” VT37 no. 2 (1987): 180-181. 21 Cf. Keel and Uehlinger, Gods, Goddesses, 210. See also Hadley, “Two Pithoi from Kuntillet Ajrud,” 184; Dijkstra, “I Have Blessed You By Yhth of Samaria and His Asherah,” 17-18. 22 Cf. Zevit, The Religions of Ancient Israel, 374-376, especially the objections against the caravanserai-interpretation in nt. 47. According to Brian B. Schmidt, “The Iron Age Pithoi Drawings from Hor- vat Teman or Kuntillet Ajrud: Some New Proposals,” JANER no. 2 (2002): 99-100, the fortress-like design of the building does not exclude a religious function, both military-economic and religious functions might have been combined. The finds of composite wool-linen textile fragments (tJBSSl) -according to Lev 19:19 and Deut 22:11a forbidden form of textile- is for some scholars an indication of the presence of priestly garments, because mixed textiles were prescribed for the clothes of the high priest, see Ex 28 and 39. Cf. Zevit, The Religions of Ancient Israel, 376. 23 Zevit, The Religions of Ancient Israel, 376, who prefers a ninth-century date, based on paleography, architecture, pottery, and artistic motifs. 24 The letters seem to be partly ‘Phoenician’, partly ‘Hebrew’. For detailed discussion on the form and provenance of the script, see B. A. Mastin, “The Inscriptions Written on Plaster at Kuntillet Ajrud,” VT 59 no. 1 (2009): 99-109. Mastin concludes that, as to the present state of knowledge, the texts “were produced by Israelites who had been in either direct or indirect contact with Phoenicians.” (105). He observes further that “words are written in accordance with Hebrew, not Phoenician, conventions.” (105). According to Zevit, The Religions of Ancient Israel, 37(>-377, the Ajrud inscriptions provide the first examples of an emerging Hebrew alphabet. Thus, the alleged ‘Phoenician’ letters might be due to the fact that the scribe learnt to write in ‘Phoenicia’, which also could mean the region of the Philistine coastal cities where Phoenicians traded. 25 Cf. Zevit, The Religions of Ancient Israel, 370—371. 2013/1-2 Sárospataki Füzetek 45
