Queries & Comments

008

For and Against Printing Photograph of the Erotic/Pornographic Clay Lamps from Ashkelon

It is difficult to believe you are serious in requesting reader approval to publish pictures of clay discs excavated at Ashkelon (Queries & Comments, BAR 14:02). You say that they are “blatant pornography,” and you wonder whether to “recognize overriding principles of good taste and reader sensitivity.”

Of course you should publish them!

The question is one of pure censorship. Apparently you recognize that there is no question of “obscenity,” as defined by the Supreme Court of the United States in Miller v. California (1973), because the dominant appeal is not to the prurient interest in sex; and, in any event, there is serious scientific value in the publication.

Since your concern is offensiveness and indecency, you ought to pay heed to the teaching of justice Harlan in Cohen v. California (1971) that, “one main’s vulgarity is another’s lyric.” Moreover, “we cannot indulge the facile assumption that one can forbid particular [pictures] without also running a substantial risk of suppressing ideas in the process.” He added that “the state has no right to cleanse publications to the point where they are palatable to the most squeamish among us.” For those who may be offended, the Supreme Court said, the solution is to turn away but not to suppress the speech.

These principles of First Amendment jurisprudence technically do not apply to BAR, a private [non-governmental] publication. But, they certainly present precepts of freedom of expression that should be adopted by any journal devoted to the pursuit of scholarship and truth.

Justice Harlan found the government’s suppression of “indecent” speech unconstitutional as a violation of the right of each of us to determine for ourselves what to view and hear. “No other approach,” he said, “would comport with the premise of individual dignity and choice upon which our political system rests.” If you would deprive us of that right to choose, it is proper to ask, “Who has appointed you ruler and judge over us?” (Exodus 2; 14).

This is in response to your invitation to express opinions on the publication of pictures of the “adult” artifacts found at Ashkelon. This is a no-win situation; you will be damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

My own considered opinion is DON’T, although I acknowledge that the merits and demerits are about equal.

Sophisticated people know that there is a broad streak of the salacious and scatological in mankind, male and female, ancient and modern. There is no question but that there is much rich humor present in this area, just as there is much rich humor in ethnic jokes. Unfortunately, there are many hypersensitive people to whom such humor is anathema.

Paralleling this is the matter of the “four-letter” words that are legitimate English words, most of which are in the Oxford English Dictionary and date back before 1000 A.D. Probably no modern 12-year-old is unfamiliar with them. If you include “snot,” “spit,” “puke” and several others, there are only about 20 such words and, amusingly, one four-letter word has had the “r” dropped out of it in American English to become a three-letter word.

People who commonly use these words we considered foul-mouthed. The words are rarely heard in cultured society or seen in everyday print. Other than their meaning per se, they do have a certain minimal value for shock purposes.

My criterion for these words and one that I would extend to the publication of the pictures is: Will the publication serve any useful purpose? Of course, different people will have different ideas of what constitutes “useful purpose,” and it is the function of an editor to make that decision. Let me make myself clear. In the article “Did Yahweh Have a Consort?” BAR 04:03 (Ze’ev Meshel), a picture of the Egyptian demigod Bes is shown. Here Bes is the topic; the displayed phallus is incidental and in my mind acceptable.

It seems to me that publishing the discs from Ashkelon would be stretching the word “useful” pretty far. Oh, I admit I would like to see them and so would many other subscribers. Any storm of protest would make your previous storms pale to insignificance, but could be tolerated as long as “useful” is the rationale. But in this case, would it be?

Today is a first for me. I have never written to a magazine or newspaper before. I have just renewed my subscription to your wonderful publication for another two 009years, something else that I have never done with my other publication.

Because I enjoy it so much I felt I had to respond to whether you should print photographs of the pornographic Roman lamp discs.

As an editor of a Christian newspaper, I personally would not. There is nothing that turns off a Christian faster than sexual pictures. They accept abortion, evolution and homosexuality more readily than pornography. Secondly, a fine publication such as yours should not lower itself to the depths of Penthouse. I have usually found that your writers are expert at presenting an idea so that everyone can understand the meaning. With a few simple, well-chosen words these discs could be well described and a drawing of the shapes and sizes could be offered. The pictures could also be offered to anyone who wishes to write for them or they could be put in a separate, folded, tear-out page to be kept or thrown out at the reader’s discretion.

If you think I am wrong, consider Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart: Christian society has turned its back on them and PTL went bankrupt.

I urge you to remain decent and clean. The only thing man loses by staying pure and clean is dirt.

All I want to do is to tell you how much I enjoy BAR and not to print filth. You’re above that!

Congratulations to Professor Lawrence Stager on the “pornographic” or “erotic” clay discs he found at Ashkelon. I believe it unwise to publish pictures of them, however. A simple telling of the discovery and its implications would be sufficient. My children are encouraged to read BAR and other magazines mound the house. I don’t wish to preview everything that comes into the house. Secondly, I don’t like to censor, but they are too young to see past the “erotic” nature of the discs.

NO! NO! NO! Don’t we have enough murder, rape and heartbreak, child abuse and horrors caused by this awful flood of porno. THINK! Decent parents have to have some teaching material that does not offend and sicken their children’s eyes as well as their own. It’s a bad sign that you would even think of it. Do not let “free living” people destroy a quality magazine.

On occasion I use BAR articles for my Sunday School classes. Please keep this in mind.

Some years ago, the United Church of Christ published a study course for older youth that included a picture of Michelangelo’s “David.” One large midwestern church took their copies and excised this page and sent the lot back to the publisher.

On a trip to Italy, I saw Michelangelo’s original in its magnificent glory. I believe that deliberate avoidance of any materials in a responsible journal on the subject it purports to cover is at beat irresponsible. I truly hope that BAR will not knuckle under to the obscurantists who seek to impose their “moral” standards on the full disclosure of the facts involved.

I may well hold much in common regarding “morals” with the critics of publication, but I do not think it necessary for anyone to decide what data I my peruse and what not!

There is nothing dirty about the human body. After all, we were created in the Divine Image. The word “pornography” is a “loaded” word and should not even be used by archaeologists.

Let us see history in its truth, and not merely in the reflection of our own cultural limitations. Of course, you’ll always have a few people who will cancel their subscriptions at the sight of Truth, but let them go. Those who hate the human body can find solace with their hypocrite friends like Jimmy Swaggart. BAR will be better off without them.

My vote is not to print the pornographic pictures. Since human nature hasn’t changed over the centuries, we can fill in the details of the report for ourselves.

Even though it is a delicate matter, as you stated, it still represents an aspect of life at that time. I would heartily recommend that you publish all information, even those items that we may find a bit distasteful.

The Bible itself records unwholesome situations, such as the story of Lot and his daughters and the story of Tamar and Judah. So please do not play the role of a censor, but continue to publish all items in an unbiased manner.

I strongly urge you to publish the erotic evidence from Ashkelon. Those who might protest the publication of such historical information are generally the same people who consider the Song of Solomon to be pornographic.

Publish them and let the closed minded readers be damned. It is not a matter of “overriding principles of good taste,” as suggested by Editor Shanks, but of scholarly integrity. Anything taken out of context can be made pornographic. Many parts of the Bible itself could be rendered pornographic by selective editing. I urge you not to let the principle of catering to “reader sensitivity” dictate your publishing policy.

Of course, you could publish the article on the clay discs between plain brown covers. A warning on this cover could alert overly sensitive readers to the contents. They can then rip it out if they wish and discard it, while we, the adult readers, can read on and learn.

Please retain your integrity and do not publish the pictures.

All the many aspects of BAR—the erudition, the intellectual and personal battles, even the primitive anti-intellectualism of some of the letters to the editor—are thoroughly enjoyable, but above all it is your own strong and sometimes irreverent view of the whole scene that sets the tone. Keep it up!

In regard to the lamps from the Roman bath at Ashkelon, the criterion should be the same as it is for any other material: whether it helps the reader’s understanding. Having seen a few of that genre in European museums, I suspect that all but the most prudish will find these miniatures rather tame compared to modern magazine-stand color lithography.

010

The Bible is your best source of guidance in making a decision on whether to publish photographs of the pornographic clay discs from Ashkelon. In 1 Thessalonians 5:22, we are told, “abstain from all appearance of evil.”

I have seen photographs of unclothed natives from around the world in the National Geographic and it did not offend me. And I am sure that I would not be offended by the discs, for they are of some historical significance. But there are those who surely would.

Keep up the good work and allow your God-given conscience to be your guide.

You ask readers’ ideas about whether to print repulsive, degenerate pictures. It is a wonderful idea.

Just rent the enormous subscription roster of Penthouse and Playboy and watch the money roll in.

However, be sure to enclose each issue in plastic to prevent escape of the odor for those who do not want the smell.

I say BAR[e] it all!

The “International Timeline” and Mormon Theology

I know the letters to the editor are not part of the technical articles that have been reviewed and accepted, but they are widely read, and some of them cast aspersions on Christian beliefs honestly held by many people. I believe that such letters require comment for publication.

Such a letter appears in Queries & Comments, BAR 14:02 over the signature of Mr. Mike Chouinard of Inkom, Idaho. His letter decries the fact that BAR accepted an advertisement that “supports blatant archaeological deception and historical inaccuracies” in an ad for the International Timeline chart, published by Mr. Ron Carlin of Salt Lake City. Mr. Chouinard strongly objects to the inclusion of a reference to the Nephite Culture in that chart, and contends that his “research” on the Mormon culture yields absolutely no evidence for the existence of such a culture, and he further quotes agreement by numerous anthropology departments.

Knowledge of the Nephite Culture comes principally from its record, the Book of Mormon. Millions of people worldwide, including those with modest amounts of education, and others with the most advanced degrees obtainable from well-known universities, believe the Book of Mormon to be the accurate record of the Nephite Culture that was established and flourished in Central and South America between about 600 B.C. and several hundred years A.D. As opposed to the Bible, which is accepted by hundreds of millions of people as an accurate history of the Israelite Culture, the Book of Mormon was translated directly from the gold plates, using the Urim and Thummim (which achieve status in the Bible), whereas numerous scholars still argue as to the source of the original writings that make up the Bible. To my knowledge, there is no dependable record anywhere that establishes who wrote the original chapters of the Bible, or even when. This, however, has not prevented Christians from believing it to be an accurate record of the Israelite Culture, beginning with Exodus. If it were not for the Bible, many “scholars” and laymen would question whether there was an Exodus, or even an ancient Israelite Culture. If one reads even a modest number of issues of BAR alone, he quickly becomes aware that arguments of major importance still rage over the origins and migrations of the Israelite “Culture.” Now, as opposed to the Bible, we have the sober statements of 12 people who saw the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated, and the record itself remains essentially as originally translated by non-Mormons. (There were no Mormons and no Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints [Mormon] when the Book of Mormon was translated.)

It is important to remember that Mormons did not write the Book of Mormon to prove an ancient culture and its beliefs, but the Mormon Church came about because many people read the Book of Mormon, accepted its teachings as the writings of prophets who wrote as commanded, even as did the Biblical prophets.

Now as to the archaeological evidence for the Nephite Culture. It was archaeology that finally began to document the Bible. When the Book of Mormon, appeared in 1830, there was essentially no evidence that supported the existence of the great culture now known to have flourished for hundreds of years throughout Central and South America. As more “digging” goes on, this culture, or cultures, is becoming much better known. They are just about what the Book of Mormon describes: they built tremendous cities, networks of highways, cultivated enormous acreages of crops, worked in the gold which was described as “abundant” and “plentiful” in the land.

011

Further, they built great pyramids, made human sacrifices and left important “pictorial” wirings behind. Only now are some of these writings being deciphered. Is it strange that the wirings of some of these people read from right to left, as does Hebrew, or that, as pictorial (hieroglyphic?) carvings, they read in a circle from right to left? The Book of Mormon’s historian and prophet, Mormon (Mormon 9:32), described the written language as “modified Egyptian,” which certainly fits many of these ancient writings. From things such as this, I conclude that somewhere in these cultures the “Nephite Culture” flourished until it was utterly destroyed, as was prophesied, about 400 A.D.

As to the various anthropology departments cited as supporting Mr. Chouinard’s position, I only point out that one of the main proofs of the Book of Morman lies in the fulfillment of an ancient prophecy that when the Book of Mormon came forth, it would be taken to a learned man who would say, “I cannot read a sealed book.”

As a final query, I would ask Mr. Chouinard, “If the Nephite Culture did not exist, would you please elucidate for me and other Mormons just WHO these ancient peoples were, and where they came from with their knowledge of the Jewish God of Abraham, and His Son, Jesus Christ?” Until such questions are answered unequivocably by archaeologists, I and other Mormons will continue to accept the existence of the Nephite Culture as documented in the Book of Mormon, as well as of the ancient Israelite Culture as documented in the Old Testament!

It is ironic that Mr. Mike Chouinard of Inkom, Idaho, should protest BAR’s allowing an advertisement containing material he considers to be inaccurate—the “International Time Line.” I would suggest that he does not know enough about the subject, i.e., the Nephites, to even ask the right questions of the universities he listed.

But even if he asks the right questions, he will still not see any correlation until he bothers to find out what the Book of Mormon really says now—and when it was first published in 1829.

The advertisement for the World History Chart in the March/April 1988 issue of BAR is misleading to the point of being dishonest. I intended to put it on the wall of my classroom, where I teach (among other things) the History of Science. But when I opened it, the very first thing I saw was “The Flood.” I was considerably taken aback because one would not, or at least should not, find that phraseology on a truly scholarly chart. I then checked to see if it had Adam—it did, and at about 4004 B.C. Then I noticed Adam-ondi-ahman (a Mormon term) and upon further investigation discovered this is a Mormon chart!

I have no qualms with the Mormons selling anything they want—even this chart. My qualm is with honest scholarship and honest advertising. In academia honesty is not just the best policy, it is the only policy possible. There is no way a person could tell 056from the advertisement that this chart is Mormon.

There is a scholarly way to put theological beliefs on this kind of a chart:

According to Mormonism …

The Moslems believe …

Buddhist tradition holds that …

According to the Hindu scriptures …

Christian believe …

But this is not done. Moreover, only Mormon theology is treated in a historical fashion. All of the listings for other religions are historical references: “Mohammed at Medina,” “Mohammed born at Mecca,” “Mohammed begins Muslim Religion,” “The God of Islam is Allah.”

As far as I am concerned, this is an underhanded attempt to get Mormon beliefs in school classrooms all across the country without most people even realizing it.

Over the past decade I have come to trust, use, admire and enjoy BAR. But, I have been shocked and disappointed to see your elaborate advertisements for the “World History Chart” of International Timeline.

Everyone has a right to select the events of history that he considers important and to interpret the meaning of those events as he sees fit. Certainly every group has a right to its cherished tradition and mythology. An ethical issue arises only when one presents his selection, interpretation and mythology to an unsuspecting public as factual and objective, without properly identifying himself and his cause.

When you advertised Lloyd K. Townsend’s superb painting of the City of David and Solomon in the March/April 1988 edition, you were careful to point out some possible errors. When Stonehenge Viewpoint advertises their materials, they are quick to indicate that the materials do represent a particular “viewpoint” and that they are “provocative and controversial.” BAR and International Timeline, Inc., offer no such caveats. Yet, their product, the “World History Chart,” is highly selective, interpretive and mixes totally fantastic and mythological material with historic fact.

Heaven knows money is important and a publication such as BAR must depend to some extent on advertisers. Everyone knows the Mormons have big bucks. But, I am saddened to see BAR let such monetary concerns override an interest in the presentation of accurate and reliable information to the public.

The Swastikas in the Meanders

In the November/December 1986 BAR (“Herod’s Mighty Temple Mount,” BAR 12:06), there is a photograph of an ornamental design found at the site of the Second Temple that looks to me like a form of a swastika.

In the September/October 1987 BAR (“Ancient Chorazin Comes Back to Life,” BAR 13:05), there is a photograph of what author Ze’ev Yeivin call a “meander design” [see picture below]. Have a close look at this simple meander design and, lo and behold, you will see clusters of swastikas flowing one into the other.

I am perplexed by two things. One, the author does not appear to see the dreaded form I do. Two, why does the swastika appear at so many ancient synagogue sites in Israel. I have photographs at home of at least five sites in Israel, all synagogues or their remains, and they are all adorned with swastikas of one type or another. Can no expert stand up and explain to me why they appear in Israel at that time and at so many holy sites?

Thank you for presenting such a stimulating and educational journal for all of us seekers of knowledge.

Ze’ev Yeivin replies:

The meander is a common decoration in the Classical world. It appears in several forms during all Classical periods. It usually provides a frame or a limiting line for a central design. It is carved on Hellenistic capitals, painted on Roman wall paintings and appears on mosaic floors of private homes, churches, mosques and synagogues.

The name meander comes from several rivers in Turkey named Menderes.

As an ornamental design, it appears as a 057combination of circles touching and crossing each other, or as squares in the same combination. The crossing point of the squared meander is likened to the swastika that Mr. Houpt sees.

A single swastika in the middle of a mosaic floor has been found at only one site—in the synagogue of Ein Gedi. Its meaning is unknown to us because we have no information regarding the swastika as a symbol of any sort in that period.

The decoration on the stone at Chorazin is the same well-known geometrical design framing the main decoration—the bunches of grapes.

Praise for Brandfon

I’d like to commend Fredric R. Brandfon (and you) for the mind-stretching article “Archaeology and the Biblical Text,” BAR 14:01.

It makes one wish these electronic, banal and maudlin TV preachers would “dig into tells.” Not that they would all become archaeologists, but they would learn that there are vastly deeper and highly interesting things to think about. Perhaps they could deepen our perceptions instead of titillating ancient Baal worship in modern times.

An Old Nuzi Hand Surfaces

Your report on the 1987 Annual Meeting (“A Wild, Wonderful Academic Circus,” BAR 14:02) mentioned a program on “Sixty Years of Nuzi Studies.” The mere mention of activity in that field did my heart good. You see, I was a member of the Harvard-ASOR expedition that uncovered Nuzi, participating throughout all its years except for the initial short exploratory dig carried out by Dr. Edward Chiera. During the last two years I was director of the excavations, and after termination of fieldwork I prepared the final archaeological report (Harvard University Press, 1937 and 1939). Although I have not been involved in ancient Near Eastern archaeology for half a century now, Nuzi has always occupied a place close to my heart. It is rewarding to know that work over which you figuratively sweat blood is still of interest to the academic world.

The Symbolism of Biblical Plagues

Robert R. Stieglitz’s article, “Ancient Records and the Exodus Plagues,” BAR 13:06, is an insightful essay on plagues in ancient times. Stieglitz failed to point out, however, that Biblical writers developed a plague motif into a literary archetype and used it to demonstrate the superiority and triumph of the Hebrew God over pagan deities.

In the Exodus plagues, for example, the multiplication of frogs and the darkening of the sun (to name two) show the abasement of the Egyptian deities Heqa and Amen-ra and the transcendence of the Most High God. The plagues also encouraged the Egyptians to loath their deities who were thus shown to be impotent.

The caption to the painting by Nicolas Poussin states that “[a]lthough the style of dress and architecture may not be authentic, Poussin follows the narrative account in 1 Samuel 5 precisely.” The plague under discussion is undoubtedly the dreaded Black Death, i.e., the Plague. The author of Samuel states that “five golden tumors and five golden mice” were given as an offering to the Hebrew God for the offense of capturing and profaning the Holy Ark (1 Samuel 6:4).

The “five golden tumors” represent the acutely inflamed swellings of the lymph glands that are characteristic physical symptoms of the Plague. The “five golden mice” represent the natural reservoir of Plague.

One must chuckle at the Philistines’ ignorance of the fact that Israel’s God abhorred mice and graven images. One must also wonder if the Philistines understood the etiology of the Plague.

Based upon the Biblical narrative, it seems the Plague had advanced to the deadly and highly infectious pneumonic stage where the plague bacillus is transmitted through droplets in the air. Poussin picks up this theme in his painting. Note the live rat located just beneath the relief sculpture that supports the pillar in the left of the painting. Humans in the painting are pictured covering their mouths in a feeble attempt to avoid breathing the bacillus.

Thank you for your thought-provoking articles.

Query on Dead Sea Scroll Publication Progress

In “BAR Interviews Avraham Eitan,” BAR 12:04, it was stated in a footnote that Mr. Eitan had received a report from Père Benoit on the progress of the scholars in publishing their allotments of the Cave 4 Dead Sea Scrolls. Mr. Eitan said that it would “be discussed during the coming months and the 059department … will then decide what to do.”

Have you heard anything more about this since that time? Are they taking the report seriously and really trying to make decisions, or do we assume that the Dead Sea Scroll “coverup” is still going on?

I am doing research on the Dead Sea Scrolls, and I would very much appreciate hearing about any new information you have.

I am aware that Père Benoit passed away a few months ago also. Is there any progress being made to find someone to take his place?

Avraham Eitan has been replaced as head of Israel’s Department of Antiquities. Harvard’s John Strugnell has been appointed chief editor of the unpublished scroll materials. He is talking about getting them out by the year 2000. Whether that’s good enough remains a question in the minds of many. Strugnell has promised BAR a full report.—Ed.

The Fabulous Tumor on the Edomite Head

The cover girl (or boy?) on the BAR 14:02 wears an archaic Greek griffin’s headgear—a pillar which, in the upper part, swells to a disc and then tapers sharply to a point. It is misleading to describe this figure as “wearing headgear” because this was probably thought to be part of the animal. Examples of griffins appear in Roscher’s Lexikon der … Mythologie, vol. I.2, cols. 1760, 1766, where adjacent pictures show other forms of this fabulous tumor, which was characteristic of archaic Greek griffins.

The griffin (also known as griffon, gryphon, etc.; Latin and Greek, gryps) was an imaginary flying feline most often shown with the head and talons of a bird of prey. Pictures of it appear in Egypt and Mesopotamia from prehistoric times. By the end of the Bronze Age (c. 1200 B.C.) they were common all around the eastern Mediterranean.

Presumably, folklore went with them, but from the pre-Christian age we have little save some echoes of bits of Greek legends (Herodotus 3.116, 4.13, 27; Ktesias, Indica 45.26; Aeschylus, Prometheus 802ff. etc.), discussed by Zeigler in the Real-Encylopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, vol. VII, cols. 1918–27.

The legends say nothing to explain the curious growth on the head. It seems to have begun in Mitannian pictures as a tuft of feathers or hair. [See the following letter for another suggestion.—Ed.] This was elaborated by the artists of Urartu, then by Phrygians, finally by Greeks (Börker-Klähn in Reallexikon der Assyriologie, vol. III, pp. 633–634; cf. p. 636, from neo-Assyrian seals, following A. Bisi, Il Grifone, Rome, 1965, pp. 205ff.).

Whatever their sources, the Greeks produced the clear-cut, ornamental structures on the head cited above—leave it to the Greeks to make the imaginary definite and articulate! In the Edomite statuette on BAR’s cover, the protruberance still has the unity and spontaneity of a pimple.

Another peculiarity of the Greek griffin is its pair of long, upright ears, which shoot up on either side of the head, like horns. The Edomite figurine on your cover has long, pendulous ears, but their tops are elongated to form horns somewhat similar in appearance to the ears of the Greek type. A third horn, growing from the top of the now, has parallels in Greek works which put the griffin’s peculiar growth there rather than on the top of the head (e.g., Roscher, Col. 1759).

In sum, the head has attributes corresponding to those of a seventh/sixth-century B.C. Greek griffin’s head, but no human-headed griffins have hitherto been recognized. Where do we go from here? A first step might be to give this important head a convenient name. Perhaps “Little Bat Ears” (abbreviate LBE)?

The writer is a distinguished professor emeritus of Columbia University.—Ed.

It’s All in the Eye of the Beholder

You have printed an erect penis on the front cover of the BAR 14:02. I don’t appreciate booze or bawdy materials of any kind, in any form. Unlike some folks, I think God was really seriously truthful when He had His servant write: “Be ye holy, for I am holy.”

Have you considered how many little kids look at BAR’s pictures?

For and Against Printing Photograph of the Erotic/Pornographic Clay Lamps from Ashkelon