Darren Aronofsy’s Noah film hits theaters today. So taking this as an excellent opportunity, I must tell you about the famous biblical hero’s wife. I’d be remiss if I did not bring to your attention Thorne’s “historical” novel about Mrs. Noah, Na’amah. In one of the many strange coincidences in my life, I just finished reading Noah’s Wife by T.K. Thorne this week. I’ve had Ms. Thorne’s book on my “to be read pile” (ok, bookcase) for several years since I met her in San Diego at the Historical Novel Society’s annual conference. The book was included in my check-in goody bag even though I would have paid good money to own it. A novel about a woman of the Bible? Come on. Who are we kidding here?

I meant to read Noah’s Wife right away, but I won’t bore you with my excuses for not getting to it until now. I finally looked up from all the scholarly historical articles and books I usually read and decided I needed something, well, creative and pre-historical. Of all the books that fit that description in that aforementioned bookcase, only one had to be read for an inexplicable reason. I had no idea that a major motion picture about Noah was about to be released. I had no idea that alleviating my guilt for not reading this book sooner would be this marvelous of an experience.

One of the most popular theories exploring the historical basis of the biblical flood equate the event with a massive flooding of the Black Sea around 5500 BCE (there are other theories as well). Thorne takes this educated hypothesis and runs with it, creating a very real world full of doorways constructed of hanging skins, the smells of smelting copper, and the counting of time by summers, moons and the “hand of days.” We engage in a world where widows wear white head coverings like snow-capped mountains. This is a story full of careful observations of gesture and behavior, agricultural practices and marriage customs, a fully enmeshed cultural world. I reveled in the author’s portrayal of sheepherding practices, how the ancients personified nature, and her excellent understanding of extended familial households, including the development and difference between a matrilineal/matrilocal and patriarchal kinship. Scholarship describes the dynamics of these social systems in later periods, and Thorne cogently projects these practices further back in time with measured allowances.

We learn from ethnographic and sociological studies that ancient cultures were group oriented. Members of the community had very limited concepts of individuality. Many contemporary ethnic groups exhibit many of the same characteristics and are seen as time capsules of ancient practices and mores. For this reason they provide insight into ancient biblical societies. I’m reminded of a fairly recent account of rural immigrants to Istanbul, Turkey. Pinar Uyan-Semerci conducted a study based on extensive interviews with twenty-two women from a gecekandu community steeped in poverty. Uyan-Semerci concluded that the wives and daughters “do not see themselves as separate individuals from their families.” They have little understanding of the concept of individual rights and autonomous agency. Uyan-Semerci’s fieldwork uncovered their discomfort with acting without permission from their fathers and/or husbands. They regarded their bodies as expressions of their husband’s bodies. For most of human history (and prehistory?), child-bearing and parenting constituted women’s “joy of life.” Only in unique situations did women act with anything but the extended clan in mind.

However, contemporary first-world readers have a hard time connecting with this ancient world view. So how does a historically sensitive writer portray a prehistoric women in a way we can relate to? Without any anachronistic faux pas, Thorne designs Na’amah to be fundamentally different–a person with Asperger’s Syndrome. Noah’s wife is unique and we have been invited into her exceptional world. “My mind might be damaged, but I was not stupid.” Here’s my favorite description of perceptions: “The rainbow of colors that sounds made in my mind distracted me.” It was in the rainbow of sensation that she truly understood the world around her. She knew when a man did not have a wife because a woman would have forced him to take a bath in the river. She understood the difference between a goat’s and sheep’s sensitivities to the unexpected. She knew how to pick through the world of sounds to find the “subtle undertone of an active hive” that wove the air like fine stitching. She gathered stones, separating the interesting ones to be placed on her mother’s grave and those the right size for her slingshot. Because she notices everything, we learn everything about her inner and outer world. This is a story that plumbs the emotional chasm between “women’s and men’s” culture, the origins of patriarchy and the decline of the goddesses. T. K. Thorne finds the balance, the white bird of peace. In case you were curious, the Noah of Thorne’s novel remains one righteous guy.

Ask anyone who studies the Bible and you will learn that there are many ways to read the narratives. Sometimes rewriting them is another way to read them carefully. I’ve written about Noah’s wife before but it is an ugly story. When my nine-year-old daughter asked me about her I stopped for a moment, wondering if she should hear what I’d uncovered about of the sordid tale. I’d already read her the children’s book, Noah’s Wife: The Story of Naamah by Sandy Eisenberg Sasso (which I highly recommend), an uplifting version about how she sowed the seeds of life after the waters faded. But after the flood of childhood passes, what do you tell your daughters? I believe the story of Noah’s wife was preserved as a warning to children, to prepare for the worst. Perhaps her ribald story was told around the campfire at night to prepare the young ones for the monsters that lurked in their souls or behind a family member’s deer-skin door.

After preparing my daughter for a hard story, I told her about what I understood about Noah’s wife. She was appalled. She hasn’t wanted to talk to me about a woman of the Bible since. Of course I wonder if I made the wrong choice. Should I have silenced Noah’s wife along with all the other difficult stories about women in the Bible? Should I have sent my daughter away from the campfire before the clan’s storyteller began to speak of ancient “Grimms Brothers” tales?

T.K. Thorne wrestles with the “dark” side of this story but in an entirely different way than the way I’ve perceived it. Her rendition flies over the ancient lands of Anatolia like a falcon intent on a mouse for dinner. She works with the given text but finds nourishment where the received story left pain and unanswered questions. I think I will read this loving, but grown-up story to my daughter. But first we must finish reading The Borrowers together. One step at a time. There are many ways to read a story.

For Further Reading

Uyan-Semerci, Pinar – “A Relational Account of Nussbaum’s List of Capabilities,” Journal of Human Development 8 (2007) 203-21.

This is an update on my post for International Women’s Day regarding Jezebel and her seal. If you recall, a recent article by Lawrence Mykytiuk (Associate Professor of Library Science at Purdue University), “50 People in the Bible Confirmed Archaeologically” did not mention any women on the list. I posted a comment on the Biblical Archaeology Society (BAS) site lamenting the missing women. Not realizing that my comment disappeared into the ether zone, I thought BAS and Professor Mykytiuk disregarded my attempt to participate in the discussion. So I must apologize for the indignation I expressed in my post.

Once the web editor of BAS discovered that my remarks never made it to the comments section, he encouraged me to resubmit. Second time around, I wrote:

“I note that all 50 of the historical figures mentioned are men. That got me wondering why Jezebel didn’t make the list. A BAR article about her signet seal written by M. Korpe, “Fit for a Queen: Jezebel’s Royal Seal” outlines the basis for determining that the artifact belonged to the much-despised queen. Sure it came from a private collection (and therefore unprovenanced) but as Korpe mentions, only about 10% of ancient near eastern seals come from archaeological excavations. For many scholars, the lack of a “paper trail” for artifacts does not necessarily relegate them to the dustbin.”

Professor Mykytiuk has received a lot of responses to his article and I mentioned that I’m impressed with the time and care he has taken to replying to everyone’s comments. And I’m no exception. I actually got two responses from him. Here’s the first one.

“Yes, it is disappointing that no woman in the Hebrew Bible is among the 50 identifications confirmed in Bible-era inscriptions. (You are probably already aware of some of the following, but please be patient, knowing that others will need to read it to understand the issues.)

The short answer is that I could not use the seal of Jezebel for a firm identification, because it is from the antiquities market and therefore could be a forgery.

The archaeological record is haphazard in that only a small percentage of available sites have been excavated, and typically a given site is only partly dug. (What if they had dug two feet to the left? What did they just barely miss?) As you drive past the mounds left by ancient cities in Israel, you may see narrow trenches in the side, while the rest of the mound is untouched. The digging season is short, and excavation is painstaking work. Archaeologists often put forth heroic efforts, but the task is immense. Avraham Biran dug at Tel Dan for _25_years_ before the first “House of David” stele fragment was accidentally discovered by the team’s surveyor, Ms. Gila Cook, in 1993.

To complicate matters, some authentic, ancient artifacts are recovered by clandestine, illegal digging conducted by profiteers. They then sell these items to antiquities market vendors, who mix these authentic pieces in with plenty of forgeries, and put them all up for sale, together. Another twist is that some authentic pieces are altered, perhaps by adding writing, in hope of bringing in a higher price (these are technically called fakes).

Of course, it is risky to buy anything on the antiquities market. As Prof. Nili S. Fox of Hebrew Union College, whose published dissertation I used in mine, has emphasized, if an item is of unknown origin (provenance) it cannot be used to draw conclusions. It could be a forgery or a fake.

That’s why I have not used items of unknown provenance to make identifications–unless there was some reliable way to know that they are authentic.
I have used 2 unprovenanced seals for the identification of the biblical Uzziah, king of Judah. They were purchased on the antiquities market in 1858 and 1863, long before anyone, scholar or forger, knew what letter shapes were used in the time of Uzziah. Yet scholars who know how the shapes of Hebrew letters changed over the centuries assure us that the letter shapes fit right in with that century. The same argument supports the authenticity of the Mesha Inscription, in which one can confidently identify the biblical Omri, king of the northern kingdom of Israel, and the biblical aMesha, king of Moab.

The seal of Jezebel appeared on the antiquities market and was published in 1964, long after correct Phoenician letter shapes were known (She was a Sidonian princess who married Ahab, king of Israel). Therefore, a forger could easily have used the correct letter shapes. Also, since the letters that spell the name, YZBL, are inserted among the artistic decorations that fill most of the face of the seal, their odd placement makes the seal seem possibly to be a fake.
Nahman Avigad, who published the seal of Jezebel, was arguably the dean of Hebrew epigraphy (the study of inscriptions). In his article, Nahman Avigad, “The Seal of Jezebel,” Israel Exploration Journal 14 (1964); 274-276, he stated on p. 275, “Obviously our seal was not manufactured with any intention of inserting an inscription. . . . The four Phoenician characters are widely dispersed among the emblems . . . . The vertical stroke of the third letter converges, for want of space, with the border line of the seal.

On the same page, he states: “Jezebel is known from the Bible . . . (1 Kings 16:31). There is, of course, no basis for identifying the owner of our seal with this famous lady, although they may have been contemporaries, and the seal seems worthy of a queen.”

I arrived at the list of 50 persons above with the intention of composing a nucleus of strong identifications that would stand the test of time. Clearly, I could not use the seal of Jezebel which could be a forgery or a fake.

Other reasons for not making the identification between the Jezebel of the seal and Jezebel, Queen of Israel, appear in Christopher A. Rollston, “Rollston responds to Shanks,” available free online at http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/uncategorized/rollston-responds-to-shanks/ .
In the quotation from Rollston below, I have put square brackets [ ] around my clarifying comments to separate them from Rollston’s words, The other names he mentions belong to experts in ancient inscriptions of Syria-Palestine:

“(5) Regarding the Yzbl seal. (a) There is no patronymic [father’s name–LM]. (b) There is no title. [Seals were the customary place where dignitaries listed their titles.–LM] (c) [author Marjo C.] Korpel restores a letter to get the reading she wants…in spite of the fact that there are other good options (see my article at http://www.asor.org). (d) I would not be inclined to date the script to the 9th century. [Jezebel ruled in the 9th century, ca. 873-852 B.C.E.–LM] (e) I am aware of no epigraphic Old Hebrew seal or bulla from a scientific expedition that was found in a 9th century context. See the comments of A. Mazar at http://www.asor.org in this connection as well. In addition, I have talked with Helene Sader and she has stated that she is not aware of any epigraphic Phoenician seal or bulla that has been found in a 9th century context in Lebanon. The earliest provenanced Aramaic epigraphic glyptics are arguably the Hamat materials (so Alan Millard, and I concur). (f) The Shema Seal from Megiddo has normally been considered 8th century, rather than 9th. See Sass-Avigad for a discussion of the literature.”

To clarify, “Sass-Avigad” is currently the major publication of most seals and seal impressions of Israel, Judah, and their near neighbors (Moab, Edom, Aram, etc.):
Nahman Avigad and Benjamin Sass, _Corpus of West Semitic Stamp Seals_ (Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Israel Exploration Society, and The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, The Institute of Archaeology, 1997).

Sorry for such a long post, Robin, but your question is important, and the issues take a bit of explanation.”

Given Professor Mykytiuk’s reading proficiency in Aramaic, Canaanite dialects, Greek, Hebrew, Phoenician, Syriac, and Ugaritic languages, I am going to let the good doctor have the last word on the subject of Jezebel’s seal. Here’s his second response to my comment.

“Yes, your comment is quite right that, “as Korpe[l] mentions, only about 10% of ancient near eastern seals come from archaeological excavations. For many scholars, the lack of a ‘paper trail’ for artifacts does not necessarily relegate them to the dustbin.”

First, Prof. Marjo C. A. Korpel’s estimate of 10% seems about right, estimating the percentage from Avigad and Sass, _Corpus of West Semitic Seals_. It has been documented that this relatively small percentage was troubling to Avigad.

Second, because items that have appeared on the antiquities market, whose actual origin is unknown, _might_ be authentic, they should not be ignored and must not be consigned “to the dustbin.”

Although I regard items from the antiquities market as generally untrustworthy, I can honestly say that I have not relegated them to the dustbin.

Prof. Korpel’s easily stated remark, which she has applied to the one inscription in question, has proven somewhat labor-intensive to put into practice. I covered 78 inscriptions from the antiquities market in my published dissertation. First, I went though all or almost all relevant publications to identify them, then I researched them further in the literature. Then I analyzed these 78 marketed inscriptions, subjecting them to the eleven criteria that I had previously formulated (building in part on a short article in modern Hebrew by Avigad). My detailed examinations of 9 of these unprovenanced inscriptions are there for all to see in IBP, chapter 4, pp. 153-196 (44 pages of technical writing). Also in IBP, Appendix B, pp. 211-243, expands the scope of chapter 4′s coverage by listing and evaluating all 78 inscriptions that I labeled “Marketed,” meaning that they are from the antiquities market.

Thus I have not ignored these inscriptions. I just don’t consider them authentic unless their authenticity, hence their reliability, can be demonstrated.”

Along with several other writers, I’ve been interviewed in the premiere issue of the Women’s Fiction Writers Association quarterly e-zine, Write On! 

You can find my comments in The WFWA Cafe starting on page 7. Enjoy a small slice of my writing life by clicking here. If you write women’s fiction, I highly recommend reading the entire publication and investigate the organization further.

This is picture is from a Brindisi online news source. That’s me 2nd from the left.

Last year on International Women’s Day I joined a number of women in a night march through the town of Brindisi. We walked silently along the main street, 5 meters apart from each other. Each of us wore a placard with the name of a woman who had been killed in the last year in Italy at the hands of a relative. Mine listed a 70 year-old woman killed by her grandson. Everyone came to a stop on the sidewalks. The cars unable to move quit honking their horns. The city became quiet, watching over 147 women walk with purpose. I expected insults in this extremely conservative part of a very conservative country, but instead I felt great respect for our actions. We gathered in the main square and one by one we stepped up to the loudspeaker and recited the information on our card (in Italian! I’m so proud of myself!). Then we laid out a pair of red shoes in the piazza. By the end of the procession, the main square of Brindisi was paved with the red shoes of every kind. My friend Maggie spray-painted a pair of pumps in the parking lot just prior to the march. I set them down in the sea of shoes, grateful for the opportunity to participate in an international call for women’s rights.

This year, in the same spirit of remembering lost women, I’m bringing to your attention an example of an ancient historical woman being overlooked by “malestream” scholarship. In the March/April edition of the Biblical Archaeology Review, Lawrence Mykytiuk wrote an article entitled “Archaeology Confirms 50 Real People in the Bible.” I was surprised to discovered that not one woman was mentioned in the list. Primarily I wondered why Queen Jezebel’s seal was missing. Even the same publication discussed this archaeological discovered in and article by the title of “Fit for a Queen: Jezebel’s Royal Seal.” When I return to the states and have access once again to my library, I will tell you much more about the notorious queen known for her evil ways. You will learn that there is another side to the woman we’ve love to hate for millennium.

Photo credit: Israel Museum, Jerusalem

In the meantime, let me tell you about the archaeological evidence for this historical figure. In ancient Israel, documents were tied with a cord then dolloped with wet clay which was then pressed with the person’s unique seal. Thousand of these seals have been recovered in Israel, but only 35 belonged to women. Only the most elite women possessed their own signets. Jezebel’s seal came from a private collection and came to scholars’ attention in 1960 when it was donated to the Israel Department of Antiquities. The famous paleographer, Nahman Avigad published the finding, explaining that it bore the inscription YZBL (יזבל), which spells Jezebel in Hebrew. It’s actually a rare Phoenician name and the seal is filled with popular Egyptian symbols, the fad in Phoenicia at the time. However, the depiction of a winged sphinx, winged sun disk and a falcon were symbols usually reserved for royalty. “So, independent of the name of the owner, the iconography definitely suggests a queen,” Korpel writes. The size and intricacy of the seal suggests a prominent owner, all in keeping with Jezebel’s royal heritage. And one more thing, the style of the letters on the signet is Phoenician. All these tale-tale signs add up to one conclusion: “it is very likely that we have here the seal of the famous Queen Jezebel” (Korpel).

So I wrote to the editor of Biblical Archaeology Review calling to attention the oversight of Jezebel’s seal. Every day the author of the article about the 50 historical biblical people confirmed by archaeology replied online to a large number of letters to the editor, all of which discussed the men on the list. I waited a week for my inquiry to appear in the comments section (which you can access here. It appears that my input is not worthy of being posted, much less commented upon.

All of this makes me wonder what other women have been overlooked by scholars. It is this kind of erasure of ancient women’s history that keeps me fired up in my mission to bring their stories to light. Thank you Biblical Archaeology Review for the inspiration to keep doing what I love to do!

For Further Reading

Korpel, Marjo C.A. “Fit for a Queen: Jezebel’s Royal Seal.” Biblical Archaeology Review, Mar/Apr 2008, 32-37, 80.

Marjo C.A. Korpel, “Seals of Jezebel and Other Women in Authority,” Journal for Semitics 15 (2006), p.349 (www.sasnes.org.za/SASNES_Journal_for_Semitics.htm. PDF available from www.otw-site.eu/en/news-en.php).

Mykytiuk, Lawrence. “Archaeology Confirms 50 Real People in the Bible.” Biblical Archaeology Review, Mar/Apr 2014.

House of Mary on Nightingale Mountain (Bulbul Dagi)

Before traveling to Ephesus in present day Turkey this past fall, I learned that the Catholic Church believes that the actual site of Mary’s house has been found. Popes have even visited it and now over a million visitors tour the little structure every year. Since I was in the area I might as well visit, right?

So I began studying how in the world the Catholics were so certain that the actual house of Mary had been found. Can we trace what happened to Jesus’ mom after the crucifixion? The last we hear of her in the New Testament is in the Gospel of John:

Now there was standing by the cross of Jesus his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus, therefore, saw his mother and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold thy son.’ Then he said to the disciple, ‘Behold thy mother.’ And from that hour the disciple took her unto his home.” John 19:25-27

Many have speculated that this unnamed disciple was John the son of Zebedee. Furthermore, this John is widely believed to have written the Gospel of John as well as Revelations. Most scholars find weighty arguments against this claim since the son of Zebedee was a fisherman and unable to write (Acts 4:13). Regardless, early church writers affirmed that he moved with Mary to Ephesus where he lived to an old age and died peacefully. The early Christian community in Ephesus kept alive the memory of Mary’s residence there, eventually building a church dedicated to her in the fourth century C.E.

Nice story but then it gets weirder. In the 19th century a German nun, Katarina Emmerich, claimed that the location of the house of Mary near Ephesus was revealed to her in a dream. Based on the details described by the nun, Lazarist fathers from Izmir explored the area and found the house she described. The existing house is clearly not the home of Mary, since according to archaeological examination the house dates from Byzantine times.

However, the house is built on the remains of a much earlier structure dating from the 1st century CE. Behind the house early explorers discovered rocks with Hebrew inscriptions from Jewish settlers living on the mountain prior to the time Mary could have lived here. A part of me wants to believe with the Catholics that a small band of refugees from Jerusalem joined fellow Jews on Nightingale Mountain and one among them was Mary, the mother of Jesus.

On one of my various trips to Rome I made a point to visit the archaeological city of Ostia near the Fiumicino Airport. This ancient harbor town once stood at the mouth of the Tiber River about 30 km from Rome. Big ships stopped here to unload their goods which would then be transported overland or on smaller boats up the river to the imperial city. Visitors arriving from a sea voyage, such as the apostle Paul, disembarked at this point. Jewish travelers undoubtedly sought out Ostia’s synagogue, one of the oldest in the world and the oldest in Europe. The apostle taught at this place of assembly and perhaps lodged there as well.

Ancient synagogues typically provided lodging and food for travelers. The original countertops of the kitchen area of the Ostia synagogue have been preserved.

Long before Paul’s arrival, the apostle Junia resided in Rome where she was deeply involved in the Jewish communities and the house churches of what would eventually become the Christian community. In my retelling of her story, Junia arrived via a merchant ship in 40 C.E., and she too made her way to the Ostia synagogue near the ancient shoreline on Via Severiana. Today, the shoreline has long receded so that neither the Mediterranean nor the Tiber are visible.

The building dates from the reign of Claudius (41-54 CE) and continued in use as a synagogue into the 5th century CE. Excavation brought to light menorah reliefs and the original paving in geometric patters such as this detail of the Knot of Solomon mosaic.

I can’t tell you what a thrill it was to stand in the remains of this building while imagining some of its ancient visitors standing in this exact place. It’s that excitement that draws pilgrims from around the world to walk in the footsteps of the illustrious. If you feel compelled to make this same trek, be sure to purchase the site map. Otherwise, you will wander for hours in the large archaeological park without finding the synagogue. I know this from experience!