The Case of the Two Volute Capitals from Tel Hazor

ABSTRACT

This article contests the interpretation of the two volute capitals discovered at Hazor in the late 1950s put forward by Kleiman (online 2021; print 2022), who viewed these monumental artworks in their secondary depositional location as silent testimony for a political shift experienced by the city in the Iron Age IIB. Unearthed in secondary use in Stratum VII and originally belonging in an earlier, 9th-century bce, context of Stratum VIII, a re-evaluation of the peculiar findspot of these two volute capitals is called for. When analysed against the broader background of Strata VIII–VII and considered in the light of recent studies on the iconography of the volute motif, an adequate reconstruction of their deposition history emerges. This sheds fresh light upon their symbolic significance and bears implications for the political status of Hazor Stratum VIII.

KEYWORDS:

• Volute capitals
• gate monuments
• Hazor
• Israel
• Iron Age

Acknowledgements

I wish to express my deep gratitude to Prof. Tallay Ornan of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem for reading a draft of this paper and offering her valuable comments. Needless to say, the ideas expressed herein are the author’s alone. Figure 1 was reproduced by Dr Sveta Matskevich with the permission of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Israel Exploration Society. My thanks are extended to the Yoav Tzionit (Israel Antiquities Authority), to Yohn Nedjer (Israel Antiquities Authority) and to Dr Matskevich (Israel Antiquities Authority and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) for their assistance. Last but not least, I am grateful to Tsipi Kuper-Blau for her meticulous editing of the paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.‏

Notes

1 Various terms have been used to denote these carved stones, which are mostly referred to as ‘Proto-Ionic’ or ‘Proto-Aeolic’ capitals. In recent years, following the discovery of many other such monumental artworks, this term was reconsidered, and today they are widely referred to as ‘volute capitals’ (for the history of terminology, see, among many others, Betancourt 1977, 4; Shiloh 1979, 88–91; Drinkard 2004; Franklin 2011, 129, no.1; Lipschits 2011, 203–04 with further literature). Notably, the architectural function of those monumental stones carved with the double-volutes motif appears to have been not only capitals (Franklin 2011; Kletter 2015, 60, 64); therefore, the term ‘double-volutes stones’ would be more suitable in describing the broader phenomenon of these stone-carved monuments. Nonetheless, since the southern Levantine repertoire presents close artistic affinities, and to refrain from further terminological confusion, this paper uses the common term ‘volute capitals’ to describe these monumental artworks.

2 My thanks are extended to my colleagues at the Israel Antiquities Authority, Yoav Tzionit, Yohn Nedjer, and Dr Sveta Matskevich, who guided me through the files available from the Hazor 1958 season of excavations (basket lists, daily descriptions, etc.). Dr Matskevich also kindly located other files of the Yadin expedition stored at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. These files contributed a great deal of field information for the nature of the two capitals’ findspot and their immediate surroundings.

3 According to the daily descriptions in the field of the 1958 season, the two capitals were first uncovered on August 8, 1958. In the basket list from August 11, 1958, their top height was recorded as 235.40 m asl, leaving only 7 cm for the oven’s opening.

4 Monumental architecture is largely conceived as a significant catalyst in the creation and development of royal official ideology (Harmanşah 2007; 2013; Routledge 2004). Within the urban landscape, the gateway structures, charged with symbolic significance, undoubtedly played an important role in the projection and expression of royal elite ideology and political sovereignty (Ussishkin 1989; Mazzoni 1997; Weber 2017; Hermann 2019 with further literature). However, these concepts of kingship and royal ideology lie beyond the scope of this paper, which aims to focus on the gate monuments’ protective and divine authority values.

5 Due to their lack of a sound archaeological context, the Karak Castle relief orthostats present a considerable obstacle to placing them within their proper architectural, chronological, and historical contexts. By way of circumstantial evidence and parallels from north Syria, Weber has suggested that they are probable evidence for gateway figures (Weber 2017, 97, 100). See also the incised stone reliefs found in Tulul adh-Dhahab (Thomas Pola et al. 2013; 2016) found there in secondary use.

6 The Assyrian practice of placing lion sculptures and reliefs in palace entrances was borrowed from north Syria, where they were located in city gates. My thanks are extended to Prof. Tallay Ornan for her input.

7 Like the palace porch, the temple porch can be considered the gate leading into these buildings, and as such, ‘appealed for both protection and celebration’ (see Mazzoni 1997, 329).

8 Tallay Ornan made this suggestion in a lecture delivered at the 14th annual conference of the ‘New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and Its Region’, held on 6 October, 2021, at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center in Jerusalem.

9 Yadin denoted this building as a ‘citadel’, reconstructing its superstructure plan as a four-room house (Yadin 1975, 164–65). For a suggested bīt ḫilāni reconstruction of this edifice, see Finkelstein 1999a, 61; Sharon and Zarzecki-Peleg (2006, 152–53) argued that this building was an example of royal architecture.

10 Determining the specific stratigraphical attribution of the two volute capitals is not an easy task. Considering the excavators’ difficulties in determining the precise nature of Stratum VII (see above), the only change they ascribed to this stratum was the construction of Enclosure 3264, along with the raising of the floor level in the large open square. Notably, this square, slanting sharply from east to west approximately 1m, consisted of multiple layers. Some were defined as ‘layers of mud plaster’ (Ben-Tor 1989, 96) or ‘mud plaster floors’ (Ben-Tor 1989, 99), not shown or noted in the final report. According to the excavators: ‘In this open space, especially in its eastern part, we found several [emphasis mine—D.B.-A.] superimposed mud plaster floors. The lowest, 3270, has been assigned to Stratum VIII, while the uppermost, 3259, belongs to Stratum VII’ (Ben-Tor 1989, 99). The Stratum VII plan (Ben-Tor 1989, Plan XXI) shows that the height of the two capitals’ lower sides is 234.84 m asl, while those ascribed to Stratum VII Floor 3259 are 235.30–35.00 m asl, c. 0.3 m higher than the capitals’ lowermost height. During Stratum VI, a new floor (3180) was laid over the two capitals; this floor was made of clay and was partially paved with small stones. The uncertainty about the stratigraphical affiliation of the Stratum VIII–VI remains in the large square is further reflected in the excavators’ basket list. On 11–15 August, 1958, upon its excavation, the stratigraphy of Floor 3259 could not be accurately ascribed and was recorded as ‘Intermediate VII–VI’.

11 According to the excavators, ‘no change in plan occurred in the large citadel or the northern or southern ancillary buildings during the transition from Stratum VII to Stratum VI, nor were alternations in their floor levels observed’ (Ben-Tor 1989, 100). This clearly indicates that there was no structural justification for bringing that amount of fill material, if not to intentionally bury the monumental voluted stones.

12 Bjorkman has commented on a somewhat similar phenomenon in the Riemchengebäude at Uruk as an ‘example of a structure clearly laid out for ritual purposes, in which valuable artifacts were buried in a ritual involving limited use of fire’ (1999, 110–11). The use of fire for similar purposes was suggested in the case of the Nuzi’s Ishtar Temple A and perhaps also in Mari’s Ishtarat and Ninizaza Temples (1999, 112–13).

13 According to Kleiman, Enclosure (not ‘Building’ as denoted by him) 3264 was the only change introduced in the layout of Area B in the transition between Strata VIII and VII (ignoring the larger body of archaeological evidence for the nature of Stratum VII throughout the site, above). In this respect, it is incomprehensible how the complete vessels found in this poorly constructed enclosure indicate the ‘continuous activity in the area during the lifetime of Stratum VII’ (online 2021, 8; print 2022, 192).

14 Recently, three volute capitals were unearthed at Armon ha-Natziv, overlooking ancient Jerusalem (Billig et al. 2022). These volute capitals were lying on a plastered floor (L26), two found one on top of the other (2022, 14). In addition, fragments of small capitals forming part of a decorated railing, window frames, and painted architectural elements were also found lying in two rock-hewn trenches (L22 and L23). The two volute capitals found one on top of the other, in an excellent state of preservation, were correctly interpreted as having been intentionally buried (2022, 14, 28). That interpretation should also be extended to the third. The motivation for this act should not be associated with an effort to desecrate a royal symbol or for secondary use to seal the rock-hewn niche. Instead, a ritual burial must have been the case of the Armon ha-Natziv’s volute capitals (and the other architectural elements possessing similar qualities). As only a limited area of the site was excavated, and due to extensive damage caused by modern construction and intensive robbing, the sparse remains ‘preclude an understanding of the site’ (p. 27). Any attempt to determine the site’s components and their stratigraphical and architectural relationships is, at best, speculative, the square latrine included. Nonetheless, the volute capitals must have adorned an important passageway within this royal estate, the main structure of which has yet to be unearthed, and later were buried nearby in the act of veneration.

15 Finkelstein has suggested attributing the original placement of the Hazor volute capitals to Stratum X (2000, 118; 2013, 96), but there is no archaeological evidence to support this assumption.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Doron Ben-Ami

Doron Ben-Ami is a senior expert archaeologist at the Israel Antiquities Authority, Israel. He was engaged in the ongoing excavations at Tel Hazor and, together with Prof. Amnon Ben-Tor and Dr Déborah Sandhaus, was responsible for analysing and publishing the final report on the Iron Age strata of the renewed excavations (Hazor VI). For nearly ten years, he co-directed, together with Dr Yana Tchekhanovits, the excavations project at the Givʿati Parking Lot in the City of David, Jerusalem, on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority.