IN THE NEGEV: EVIDENCE FROM NESSANA

This paper deals with two Armenian inscriptions, one a graffito written on stone and the other, an incised finger-ring, found in Nessana in the west- ern part of central Negev desert in the South of , 52 km southwest of Beersheba. Both finds were excavated in the 1930s by an expedition led by H.D. Colt1, but have remained hitherto unpublished2. Their location is of high importance, indicating the presence of Armenians in the Negev, for which there is almost no other epigraphic evidence3. This presence is explained as part of the Christian pilgrim traffic through the Negev towards Mount Sinai4 in the Byzantine and Early Islamic periods, in which the Armenians had a prominent role5. The historical significance of the Nessana inscrip- tions is thus twofold: while further illustrating the Armenian participation in Holy Land pilgrimage, they also serve to underline the role of Nessana as an important transit place for pilgrims traveling to Mount Sinai. In what follows, we shall discuss some of the historical and geographi- cal aspects of the pilgrim traffic to Mount Sinai with special emphasis on the role of Nessana. This will serve as an explanatory background for associating the Armenian finds with pilgrimage, after which the inscrip- tions themselves are presented and analyzed.

1. TravelRoutestoSinai

Two main routes reached Mount Sinai from the borders of Palestine6. One was the western route, which ran along the northern coast of the Sinai Peninsula, turned southward to Clysma (modern Suez) and thence

1 COLT,ExcavationsatNessana. 2 The study of the finds and relevant archival documents became possible thanks to the generous help of Alegre Savariego of National Treasures Department of Israel Antiquities Authority in . Our most sincere gratitude should be extended to Michael Shenkar of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Leonid Belyaev of the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences and Zaruhi Hakobyan of the State University. 3 The single other piece of evidence from the Negev is a fragmentary Armenian graffito recently discovered in Shivta, see TCHEKHANOVETS – TEPPER – BAR-OZ, ArmenianGraffito fromShivta. 4 Traditionally identified with Jebel Musa in southern Sinai. 5 This role is attested both by epigraphic evidence from the Sinai Peninsula: STONE, ArmenianInscriptionsfromSinai, and by literary evidence: STONE, HolyLandPilgrimage, esp. p. 106-110 for Mount Sinai. 6 The following discussion is confined to the routes which connected Mount Sinai with the holy sites of central and northern , for this is the relevant geographical context

LeMuséon 132 (1-2), 123-137. doi: 10.2143/MUS.132.1.3286536 - Tous droits réservés. © Le Muséon, 2019. 124 O. POGORELSKY – M.E. STONE – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS entered into Sinai, thus reaching the Holy Mountain from the west. This was the road taken by the famous pilgrim Egeria in the 380s. The second route, and the one relevant to us here, crossed the Negev desert from the city of Elusa towards the Gulf of Aila (Aqaba), and then entered into Sinai, thus reaching the Holy Mountain from the east7. This eastern route is described in a Latin pilgrim guide from the first half of the sixth cen- tury, known as DesituTerraeSanctae (On the Topography of the Holy Land) ascribed to Theodosius8. That guide also mentions the western route, referred to as the route “through Egypt”, implying thereby that at the time of its composition both routes were in use. A testimony of a pilgrim, who used the eastern approach to Mount Sinai, although not exactly on the same route as that given by Theodosius, is found in the itinerary of the Piacenza Pilgrim, who visited the Holy Land in the 570s9. His travelogue provides, among other things, an invaluable description of the road that crossed the Negev enroute to Mount Sinai10. The journey passed through Elusa, which is referred to as located “at the head of the desert which reaches Sinai.” Twenty miles from Elusa, the pilgrim came upon a fort (castrum), in which there was a hospice dedi- cated to St. George (xenodochiumsanctiGeorgii). After leaving the fort, the pilgrim entered the “inner desert”, i.e., the wilderness of the southern Negev and Sinai. The itinerary does not mention any other stopping places after the fort, indicating that the pilgrim might have followed a direct route from the Negev to Mount Sinai across the Tih plateau11. The location of the fort with the hospice of St. George has usually been identified with Nessana, whose distance from Elusa matches the descrip- tion of the Piacenza Pilgrim, although a case has been made for identify- ing it with the neighboring site of Mizpe Shivta12. Nessana is known to have played a major role in facilitating the pilgrim traffic from the Negev to Mount Sinai. Owing to its strategic location as the last substantial settlement in the Negev before the road entered the wilderness, Nessana for travelers passing through Nessana. Naturally, there were also other travel routes for those coming from Egypt or from Transjordan. 7 For travel routes to Mount Sinai, see MAYERSON, PilgrimRoutes; STONE, Armenian InscriptionsfromSinai, p. 36-52; DAHARI,MonasticSettlements, p. 9-15. Very insightful information can now also be found in STONE, UncoveringAncientFootprints. 8 GEYER, ItineraHierosolymitana, p. 148 (§ 27). For an English translation, see WILKINSON, JerusalemPilgrims, p. 70. 9 GEYER, ItineraHierosolymitana, p. 181-183 (§§ 34-36). For an English translation, see WILKINSON, JerusalemPilgrims, p. 85-87. 10 See MAYERSON, DesertofSouthernPalestine, esp. p. 169-172. 11 MAYERSON, Pilgrim Routes, p. 46-47. 12 For the arguments in favor of identifying the fort with Nessana, see MAYERSON, DesertofSouthernPalestine, p. 170-171. For the arguments in favor of Mizpe Shivta, see FIGUERAS, TheLocationofXenodochiumSanctiGeorgii. ARMENIANS IN THE NEGEV 125 became an essential stopping point for pilgrims, providing them with the necessary logistical infrastructure for the long and difficult desert jour- ney, upon which they were about to embark. Clear evidence for this is found in the Nessana papyri, among which there are two formal orders, dated to the 680s, from the Muslim governor to the people of Nessana, asking them to supply guides to Mount Sinai13. Not only do these requests testify for the continuation of pilgrimage to and veneration of Mount Sinai under the Muslim rule, they also point to the established role of the people of Nessana as suppliers of guides, and presumably other necessary services, for pilgrims to the Holy Mount. Considering the fact that the Muslim governor resided in Gaza, from where one could reach Mount Sinai using the western route, his address to the people of Nessana indicates that during the seventh century, the custom- ary and perhaps even the preferable route to Mount Sinai was the eastern one, namely across the Negev with an important stop for logistic arrange- ments at Nessana.

2. ArchaeologicalContext

For fuller understanding of the significance of the Armenian inscrip- tions from Nessana, a brief sketch of the topography and layout of the site is in order. Nessana (: Auja el-Hafir) was a large village, located on the southwest edge of the settlement cluster of the central Negev, 10 km west of Shivta. The town is not mentioned in literary sources and its name was recovered solely from the papyri found at the site. Like other sites in the central Negev, Nessana began its history as a Nabatean settlement during the Hellenistic and early Roman periods and reached its peak during the Byzantine period. While the papyri clearly attest changes, mainly in language and administration, following the Muslim conquest in the first half of the seventh century, no traces of such Muslim features are found in the archaeological remains. The prosperity of the town at the end of the sixth and beginning of the seventh centuries, reflected in “a burst of building activity” recorded by Colt14, seems to have continued throughout the following period. Thus, a large church, one of the largest to have been discovered in the Negev, was built there at the end of the seventh century15.

13 KRAEMER, Non-LiteraryPapyri, p. 205-208 (nos. 72 and 73). 14 COLT, Excavations at Nessana, p. 21. See also KRAEMER, Non-Literary Papyri, p. 26-29. 15 This church (45 × 36.5 m), referred to as the “central” church, was excavated by the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev expedition, see URMAN, NessanaExcavations 1987-1995, p. 69f.; URMAN, Nessana. 126 O. POGORELSKY – M.E. STONE – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS

The most striking feature of Nessana’s topography is the natural hill in the middle of the town, which served as an acropolis with a large fort (85 × 35 m) built on top of it (Fig. 1). A church was erected against the northern wall of the fort, known as the Church of Sts. Sergius and Bacchus (the North Church). A second church, the Church of St. Mary (the South Church), was built on an adjacent hill south of the acropolis. Colt dated the construction of the fort to the early fifth century, while A. Negev argued for the early fourth century, in light of similarity to the fort in Avdat (Oboda)16. The fort has been associated with the military unit stationed in Nessana, as attested in the papyri17. According to Colt, the fort was not intended to house a garrison, but rather to be used as a headquarters and an armoury18. The fort remained in use throughout the time of the town’s occupation, however at some point its function changed. This happened following the dismantlement of Nessana’s military unit, which took place sometime towards the end of the sixth century19. Colt asserted that the fort was then taken over by the church authorities and converted into a monastery, which explains the additional rooms that were built at that time on the east and west sides20. Mayerson, however, suggested that the fort was converted not into a monastery, but into a hospice, the same one mentioned by the Piacenza Pilgrim. This is made chronologically possible by predating the abandonment of the military unit to the mid-sixth century, during the reign of Justinian, who, according to Procopius of Caesarea (Anecdota 24.12- 14), held back payments to the frontier soldiers (limitanei)21.

3. TheGraffitoInscription

This two-line Armenian inscription (IAA Inv. No. 36.1464, Fig. 2) is written on a wide side of a soft limestone block, possibly a voussoir or impost stone, measuring 0.3 × 0.25 × 0.15 m. The stone has chisel marks across its width; a large crack crosses the inscription. The surface following the last letter in line 2 has broken away. According to the archival records of Rockefeller Museum, the stone was discovered dur- ing the 1936 season of excavations at Nessana in the North Church complex. It has not previously been studied.

16 NEGEV, Nessana, p. 1148. 17 KRAEMER, Non-LiteraryPapyri, p. 5-6. 18 COLT,ExcavationsatNessana, p. 17. 19 KRAEMER, Non-LiteraryPapyri, p. 5, dates this event to the 580s. 20 COLT,ExcavationsatNessana, p. 17. 21 MAYERSON, DesertofSouthernPalestine, p. 170. The early dating of the abandon- ment of the military unit is supported also by NEGEV, Nessana, p. 1148. ARMENIANS IN THE NEGEV 127

Dimensions: The first line of writing measures 2.3h × 18w cm and the second line is 2.5h × 18w cm.

Transcription: 1. ԵՍ ԿՈՐԻՒՆ ԳՐԵՑԻ 2. ՈՐ ԱՆՑԱՆէ ՅԻՇԵՑԷ[

NormalizedTranscription: 1. Ես Կորիւն գրեցի 2. որ անցանէ յիշեցէ[

Translation: 1. I Koriwn wrote (this) 2. He who passes by, let him remember (me).

NotesonReadingsandInterpretations 1. The writing is quite clear and easy to read and the palaeography is discussed below. The graffito is very well preserved and probably com- plete. A crack in the stone has damaged the third letter of line 1 and the fifth letter of line 2. A final letter might have been lost (see below). 2. The name Koriwn is unusual. Ačaṙean only lists two persons with this name. One is the well-known fifth century author of the LifeofMaštoc‘ and the other is a scion of the aristocratic house of Arcruni, who lived in the seventh century22. 3. The form of the last verb in line 2, յիշեցէ, is not regular. It could be interpreted in two ways. It might be an orthographic variant or error of the subj. aor. 3ps յիշեսցէ “may he remember (scil. me).” Alternatively, we could restore a final letter, ք, which would yield a 2pp imper., “remember (scil. me)!” The loss of the rock following the letter է in this word ren- ders the matter moot. This restoration would also involve a change of person between the first verb (անցանէ 3ps pres.) and the second (յիշեցէք 2pp imper). This is not an insuperable difficulty. Here, we have chosen the first option and so translate. 4. This inscription exhibits some instances of run-over lines at angle joins, so line 1, letter 3 (barely visible); letter 6 on line 2, and perhaps both instances of Ի and both of Է (see “Palaeography” below). This is usually understood as a mark of a non-professional stone-mason.

22 AČAṘEAN, HAB, 2.676-677. 128 O. POGORELSKY – M.E. STONE – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS

Palaeography The inscription is written in clear erkat‘agir (uncial script), with no abbreviations, ligatures, or other special features. It has letter-shapes typical of the seventh and eighth century inscriptions23. The forms of the following letters are notable: Ա — the looped ayb is a common form occurring in inscriptions from the beginning down to the tenth century at least. It is not found in manuscripts according to AAP. Է — the two occurrences of this letter on line 2 are identical, with excep- tionally long horizontals and with the upright extending a short dis- tance below the second horizontal. Ի — observe that in both instances of this letter in line 1, the second, short vertical extends above the horizontal. This is uncommon. Կ — note that the descender appears to have been short, as typical of early scripts, and the right-hand descender is lost in the damage. How- ever, the placing of the horizontal on the line is a strong indication of this being an archaic form. Յ — the open form is common early, but the descending orientation and the open angle in the present instance are less usual; this feature does occur in early manuscripts, but, like other parallels in manuscripts, it may be older than 862. Ն — observe that the main ascender continues straight to the full height of the letter and the hook is added to the left. This is certainly the case in the instance in line 1 and the second instance in line 2. The first instance is damaged. The Ն which is the third letter of line 2 has a curlicue at the top of the left-hand loop. Շ — the form given here is like AAP 12 and AAP 13, from the end of the tenth century. See the development table for this letter in AAP, p. 91. Ց — the form with the closed loop at the top and the open loop at the bottom is found in St. Hṙipsimē inscription of eighth century and later in manuscripts, the clearest example being APP 12 (986).

4. Finger-ringwithArmenianInscription

According to the records of Rockefeller Museum (Inv. No. 36.1341), the ring was discovered in the Fort complex of Auja el-Hafir during

23 The writing has been compared with the table of fifth century scripts in STONE, Arme- nianInscriptionsfrom. I also consulted the letter tables in STONE – KOUYMJIAN – LEHMANN, AlbumofArmenianPaleography. This work is referred to as AAP. Finally, the table in STONE,ArmenianInscriptionsfromSinai, p. 15 has been consulted for first millen- nium lapidary scripts. ARMENIANS IN THE NEGEV 129 the 1935-36 season of the excavations (I.67, No. 219). The ring is recorded in Colt’s excavation report, under the section dealing with metal objects (Figs. 3-4), with a laconic description stating that it “bears what appears to be a bearded head with a nimbus, surrounded by an undecipherable inscription”24. Unfortunately, the ring cannot be re-examined today: it was exhibited in general exposition of Palestine Archaeological Museum, in a show box with other small finds, and was later lost, most probably stolen. The description of the ring, therefore, is based solely on the pho- tographs of the find. Bronze ring with octagonal thin hoop, flattened from the inner side, D 2.5 cm; circular flat bezel D 1.8 cm, th 0.2 cm; decorated with incised central design of a male bearded head, frontal, with a halo, surrounded by incised Armenian inscription: ԲԱԲԳԵՆ Babgen

The writing is positive and not retrograde, and therefore the ring was not meant to be used as a seal. The name Babgen appears three times among the rare early Armenian epigraphic finds from the Holy Land. One bearer of this name, an Arme- nian pilgrim of the fifth century, left his signature on the wall of the early sanctuary in Nazareth25, and signed twice on the rocks of Wadi Haggag in the Sinai26. However, judging by the stylistic characteristics of the ring and its relatively late context, its owner cannot be identified with Babgen known from the graffiti in Nazareth and the Sinai. The shape of the ring and the mode of its production, especially the octagonal band of the loop, are characteristic of Byzantine jewelry pro- duction27. Typologically, the object belongs to the category of “iconic rings”, decorated with incised images of Christ, Virgin with the Child, etc. The peak of popularity of jewelry with saints and Christological scenes is dated to the second half of the sixth to mid-seventh centuries28. Most such rings present iconic types developed and popularized by other media29; and known also from other Byzantine small metal objects, such as lead seals. For example, number of lead private seals from Caesarea

24 COLT,ExcavationsatNessana, p. 53. 25 STONE, ArmenianInscriptionsfromNazareth, p. 321 (N Arm 2). 26 STONE,ArmenianInscriptionsfromSinai, p. 118 (H Arm 26), p. 152 (H Arm 65). 27 ROSS, CatalogueoftheByzantineandEarlyMediaevalAntiquities, p. 53, no. 59; Pl. XLI. 28 RAHMANI, ByzantineBrassRings, p. 179. 29 VIKAN, EarlyChristianandByzantineRings, p. 40-41. 130 O. POGORELSKY – M.E. STONE – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS

Maritima present a frontal depiction of the Virgin with the Child or male saint30. Rings with a frontal depiction of Christ’s face are also known. A close parallel to the ring from Nessana is kept in the collection of the British Museum: it is made of gold and supplied with a retrograde Greek inscrip- tion: CΑΛΒΑΤΟΡ31. Other rings with a depiction of Christ bust, although representing different iconographic type, were discovered in Israel, in Kursi, in a funerary context from late sixth-early seventh century32, and in Caesarea, which ring was also equipped with a proper invocation and name of the owner33. It was proposed that most of such rings were not intended to be used as seals, but rather as an apotropaic object, a sort of a pilgrim relic, protecting its owner by the power of the depicted saint, holy site, etc.34 Up to date, only two rings with Armenian inscriptions have been pub- lished, both kept in the museums’ collections and lacking archaeological provenance. Typologically and iconographically, both objects can be viewed as Byzantine artifacts, with only the Armenian inscriptions defining their peculiarity. The first is a bronze finger ring in a possession of the Bible Lands Museum in Jerusalem35. Its circular bezel is incised with a design of mandrake root (?) and surrounded with a positive Armenian inscription ՄԱՐ ՍԱՐԳԻՍ : “Mar (Saint) Sargis”. The provenance of the ring is unclear. Mar Sargis, mentioned in the inscription, known in the Armenian tradition as St. Sargis Zoravar(“General”), plays an important role in apotropaic magic. The ring cannot be safely dated on epigraphic grounds: the inscrip- tion is too small and the knowledge regarding inscriptions on metal is too limited. Based on parallels of the Byzantine Solomon eulogia tokens with similar depictions of mandragoras36, the ring from the Bible Lands Museum can be stylistically dated to the mid-sixth-early seventh century. The common iconography of the “Holy Rider” or equestrian saint, identi- fied with Solomon, and later with St. George37, reinforces the proposed

30 CIIP II 2011, nos. 1762, 1765, 1766, 1768-1770, 1772. 31 DALTON,CatalogueofEarlyChristianAntiquities, p. 7, no. 40. 32 TZAFERIS – BIJOVSKY, New Archaeological Finds from Kursi-Gergesa, p. 191, fig. 18:2. 33 AMORAI-STARK – HERSHKOVITZ, AncientGems,FingerRingsandSealBoxes, p. 394- 396, no. 415, dated to the fifth-sixth centuries. 34 SPIER, EarlyChristianGems, p. 26-27. 35 First published in the catalogue of exhibition in the Bible Lands Museum in Jerusalem: WESTENHOLZ, Images of Inspiration, p. 96; for detailed discussion, see STONE, Three ArmenianObjectsfromJerusalem, p. 501-503. 36 RAHMANI, ByzantineSolomonEulogiaTokens. 37 RAHMANI, Byzantine BrassRings, p. 177-178 ; VIKAN, TwoByzantineAmuletic Armbands. ARMENIANS IN THE NEGEV 131 identification of the St. Sargis ring as belonging with the same apotropaic group, together with various “Solomonic amulets”. A second ring inscribed in Armenian is kept in the Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg38. The heavy circular bezel is set on low, almost pentago- nal hoop. It is made of gold, and has very close parallels in Byzantine world. Several rings of this type, decorated with an engraved cross, are known from the collection of the British Museum39 and from Caesarea Maritima40, generally dated to the sixth-seventh centuries. Instead of the typical equi- lateral cross, the Hermitage ring is inscribed with an Armenian letter Ա (A), flanked by three dots on each side41. Based on the parallels, the Hermitage object can be dated to the fifth-seventh century. In itself Byzantine style rings with Armenian inscriptions are unattested. In fact, only one ring inscribed in Armenian, has been reported from the region. It is a golden signet ring discovered in Yerevan, set with garnet gemstone, engraved with a Sassanian-style bird, cross and inscrip- tion: ԱԻԳՆՈԻԹԻ[Ւ]Ն ԻՆՁ Ի [ԽԱՉԷ] (“My help (is) from the Cross”)42. We can add that the large assemblage of bullae discovered in Dvin, the capital city of the Arsacid dynasty, contains seven explicitly Christian exem- plars, decorated with crosses and dated, according to their archaeological context, to the sixth-seventh centuries43. Like the rest of this assemblage, Christian bullae of Dvin are produced in the flow of the Sassanian glyptic tradition44. In the Caucasian region, signets decorated with Christian sym- bols are extremely rare45; supposedly, they were used as official seals of the high rank clergymen46.

38 ZALESSKAYA,MonumentsofByzantineAppliedArts, p. 89, no. 102. 39 ROSS, CatalogueoftheByzantineandEarlyMediaevalAntiquities, nos. 4E, 66, 67, 68. 40 AMORAI-STARK – HERSHKOVITZ, Ancient Gems, Finger Rings and Seal Boxes, p. 346-347, no. 379. 41 The Armenian letter was misinterpreted as “a monogram resembling a Russian letter Ц”: ZALESSKAYA,MonumentsofByzantineAppliedArts, p. 89. 42 KHURSHUDIAN – AKOPIAN, SasanianGoldenRing. I propose to read the first word as աւգնութիւն “help,” with an abbreviation or ligature of the diphthong in the last syllable. This is a common phenomenon. The reading with Ր makes no sense. (M.E. Stone) 43 KALANTARIAN, EarlyMedievalBullaeofDvin, p. 14-16, 37; nos. II.16, III.21, 22, V.39, 47, VI.50. 44 For Christian rings in the Sasanian cultural sphere, see LERNER, ChristianSealsof theSasanianPeriod. 45 In addition to the finds from Dvin, see LORDKIPANIDZE, GemmyGosudarstvennogo MuseiaGruzii, p. 92, no. 61 for , and GADJIEV, AttributionofGem-Seal, discussing the only attributed seal of the great Catholicos of Albania, inscribed in Middle Persian. For episcopal rings, see DALTON, CatalogueoftheFingerRings, p. XXXIV-XXXVI. 46 KALANTARIAN, EarlyMedievalBullaeofDvin, p. 25. 132 O. POGORELSKY – M.E. STONE – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS

5. Conclusions

The Armenian inscriptions shed new light on the function of the fort following the end of the military unit. According to the records preserved in Rockefeller Museum, the ring was discovered in the fort complex and the graffito comes from the North Church. Considering that both inscrip- tions most likely belong to Armenian pilgrims, their presence in the fort of Nessana and in the church next to it strongly reinforce Mayerson’s suggestion that the fort was converted into a hospice, intended to accom- modate pilgrims who were passing through the town on their way to Mount Sinai. As far as Armenian pilgrimage is concerned, the inscriptions from Nes- sana fill in a noticed gap in the distribution of Armenian inscriptions in the Holy Land from the Byzantine and early Muslim periods. In addition to the numerous graffiti from Sinai, covering the rocks of the wadis, above all Wadi Haggag, leading to Mount Sinai47, Armenian inscriptions pertain- ing to pilgrimage have been discovered in Jerusalem48, in Bethlehem49, and in Nazareth50. Thus, the Nessana inscriptions constitute a missing link in the epigraphic documentation of Armenian pilgrimage in the Holy Land, while at the same time illustrating the emphatic role of Nessana as a hub of pilgrim traffic.

Bibliography

AČAṘEAN, HAB = H. AČAṘEAN, ՀայոցԱնձանուններիԲառարան(Dictionaryof ArmenianProperNames), 5 Vols., Beirut, 1972 (Armenian). AMORAI-STARK – HERSHKOVITZ, AncientGems,FingerRingsandSealBoxes = S. AMORAI-STARK – M. HERSHKOVITZ, AncientGems,FingerRingsandSeal BoxesfromCaesareaMaritima, Tel Aviv, 2015. CIIP = CorpusInscriptionumIudaeae/Palaestinae: AMulti-LingualCorpusof theInscriptionsfromAlexandertoMuhammad, 4 Vols., Berlin, 2010-2018. COLT, Excavations at Nessana = H.D. COLT, Excavations at Nessana, Vol. 1, London, 1962.

47 STONE,ArmenianInscriptionsfromSinai. For inscriptions in other languages, mainly Greek and Nabatean, see NEGEV, InscriptionsofWadiHaggag. Many more inscriptions, from the Sinai Peninsula and elsewhere, in Armenian and other languages, are recorded in STONE, Rock Inscriptions, and in the project’s database: http://rockinscriptions.huji.ac.il. For a description of this project, see STONE, RockInscriptionsandGraffitiProject. 48 STONE,OldestArmenianPilgrimInscription (also in CIIP I no. 810a). For the archae- ological context of the inscription, see REICH – SHUKRON, WesternExtramuralQuarter. Other inscriptions: STONE – BEN-AMI – TCHEKHANOVETS, New Armenian Inscriptions; STONE – BEN-AMI – TCHEKHANOVETS, ArmenianGraffito. 49 STONE, RockInscriptions, under site name: ; CIIP IV no. 3227. 50 STONE, ArmenianInscriptionsfromNazareth; STONE – VAN LINT – NAZARIAN, FurtherArmenianInscriptions. ARMENIANS IN THE NEGEV 133

DAHARI,MonasticSettlements = U. DAHARI, MonasticSettlementsinSouthern SinaiintheByzantinePeriod:TheArchaeologicalRemains (IAAReports,9), Jerusalem, 2000. DALTON,CatalogueofEarlyChristianAntiquities = O.M. DALTON, Catalogue ofEarlyChristianAntiquitiesandObjectsfromtheChristianEastinthe DepartmentofBritishandMediaevalAntiquitiesandEthnographyofthe BritishMuseum, London, 1901. DALTON,CatalogueoftheFingerRings = O.M. DALTON, CatalogueoftheFinger Rings.EarlyChristian,Byzantine,Teutonic,MediaevalandLater, London, 1912. FIGUERAS, The Location of Xenodochium Sancti Georgii = P. FIGUERAS, The LocationofXenodochiumSanctiGeorgiiintheLightoftwoInscriptionsin MizpeShivta, in ARAM, 19 (2007), p. 509-526. GADJIEV, AttributionofGem-Seal = M.S. GADJIEV, AttributionofaGem-Sealof theGreatCatholicosofAlbaniaandBalasacanandtheMatterofProper SequenceinPatriarchateamongAlbanianChurchSovereigns, in Problemy istorii,filologii,kultury,14 (2004), p. 465-479. GEYER, ItineraHierosolymitana = P. GEYER, ItineraHierosolymitana (Corpus ScriptorumEcclesiasticorumLatinorum, 39), Vienna, 1898. KALANTARIAN, Early Medieval Bullae of Dvin = A.A. KALANTARIAN, Early MedievalBullaeofDvin, Yerevan, 1982. KHURSHUDIAN – AKOPIAN, SasanianGoldenRing = E. KHURSHUDIAN – N. AKOPIAN, TheSasanianGoldenRingwithanAncientArmenianInscription, in Zan- gak,97(1999), p. 182-187. KRAEMER, Non-LiteraryPapyri = K.J. KRAEMER, Non-LiteraryPapyri (Excavations atNessana,III),Princeton, NJ, 1958. LERNER, ChristianSealsoftheSasanianPeriod = J.A. LERNER, ChristianSeals oftheSasanianPeriod,Istanbul, 1977. LORDKIPANIDZE, GemmyGosudarstvennogoMuseiaGruzii = M. LORDKIPANIDZE, GemmyGosudarstvennogoMuseiaGruzii,Vol. I, , 1954. MAYERSON, DesertofSouthernPalestine = P. MAYERSON, TheDesertofSouthern PalestineaccordingtoByzantineSources, in ProceedingsoftheAmerican PhilosophicalSociety,107 (1963), p. 160-172. MAYERSON, Pilgrim Routes = P. MAYERSON, The Pilgrim Routes to Mount SinaiandtheArmenians, in IsraelExplorationJournal, 32 (1982), p. 44- 57. NEGEV, Inscriptions of Wadi Haggag = A. NEGEV, The Inscriptions of Wadi Haggag,Sinai(QEDEM,6), Jerusalem, 1977. NEGEV, Nessana = A. NEGEV, Nessana, in The NewEncyclopediaofArchaeological ExcavationsintheHolyLand, Vol. 3, Jerusalem, 1993, p. 1145-1149. RAHMANI, Byzantine Brass Rings = L.I. RAHMANI, On some Byzantine Brass RingsintheStateCollection, in ‘Atiqot, 17 (1985), p. 168–181. RAHMANI, ByzantineSolomonEulogiaTokens = L.I. RAHMANI, TheByzantine Solomon Eulogia Tokens in the British Museum, in Israel Exploration Journal,49 (1999), p. 92-104. REICH – SHUKRON, Western Extramural Quarter = R. REICH – E. SHUKRON, TheWesternExtramuralQuarterofByzantineJerusalem, in M.E. STONE – R. ERVINE – N. STONE (eds.), The Armenians in Jerusalem and the Holy Land (HebrewUniversityArmenianStudies, 4), Leuven – Paris – Sterling, VA, 2002, p. 193-201. 134 O. POGORELSKY – M.E. STONE – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS

ROSS, CatalogueoftheByzantineandEarlyMediaevalAntiquities = M.C. ROSS, CatalogueoftheByzantineandEarlyMediaevalAntiquitiesintheDum- bartonOaksCollection, Vol. II. Jewelry,Enamels,andArtoftheMigration Period, Washington, DC, 1965. SPIER, EarlyChristianGems = J. SPIER, LateAntiqueandEarlyChristianGems (Spätantike-Frühes Christentum-Byzanz Kunst im Ersten Jahrtausend, Reihe B. StudienundPerspektiven, 20), Wiesbaden, 2007. STONE, ArmenianInscriptionsfromNazareth = M.E. STONE, ArmenianInscriptions oftheFifthCenturyfromNazareth, in RevuedesÉtudesArméniennes, 22 (1990-1991), p. 315-322. STONE,ArmenianInscriptionsfromSinai = M.E. STONE, TheArmenianInscrip- tionsfromtheSinai, with Appendixes on the Georgian and Latin Inscrip- tions by M. VAN ESBROECK and W. ADLER (HarvardArmenianTextsand Studies, 6), Cambridge, MA, 1982. STONE, HolyLandPilgrimage = M.E. STONE, HolyLandPilgrimageofArmenians beforetheArabConquest, in Revue Biblique, 93 (1986), p. 93-110. STONE,OldestArmenianPilgrimInscription = M.E. STONE, TheOldestArmenian PilgrimInscriptionfromJerusalem, in Sion,71 (1997), p. 340-349. STONE, Rock Inscriptions = M.E. STONE (ed.), Rock Inscriptions and Graffiti Project:Catalogueof Inscriptions, Vols. 1-3 (SocietyofBiblicalLiterature. ResourcesforBiblicalStudies,28, 29, 31),Atlanta, GA, 1992-1994. STONE, RockInscriptionsandGraffitiProject = M.E. STONE, TheRockInscrip- tionsandGraffitiProjectoftheHebrewUniversityofJerusalem, in Com- parativeOrientalManuscriptStudiesBulletin, 1 (2015), p. 52-57. STONE, ThreeArmenianObjectsfromJerusalem = M.E. STONE, ThreeArmenian ObjectsfromJerusalem, in RevuedesÉtudesArméniennes, 28 (2001-2002), p. 501-507. STONE, UncoveringAncientFootprints = M.E. STONE, UncoveringAncientFoot- prints:ArmenianInscriptionsandthePilgrimageRoutesoftheSinai, Atlanta, GA, 2017. STONE – BEN-AMI – TCHEKHANOVETS, Armenian Graffito = M.E. STONE – D. BEN-AMI – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS, ArmenianGraffitofromtheCityofDavid, Jerusalem, in Revue des Études Arméniennes, 37 (2016-2017), p. 283- 286. STONE – BEN-AMI – TCHEKHANOVETS, NewArmenianInscriptions = M.E. STONE – D. BEN-AMI – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS, NewArmenianInscriptionsfromtheCity of David, Jerusalem, in Journal of the Society for Armenian Studies, 23 (2014), p. 149-152. STONE – KOUYMJIAN – LEHMANN, AlbumofArmenianPaleography = M.E. STONE – D. KOUYMJIAN – H. LEHMANN, AlbumofArmenianPaleography, Aarhus, 2002. STONE – VAN LINT – NAZARIAN, FurtherArmenianInscriptions = M.E. STONE – T.M. VAN LINT – J. NAZARIAN, FurtherArmenianInscriptionsfromNazareth, in RevuedesÉtudesArméniennes, 26 (1996), p. 321-337. TCHEKHANOVETS – TEPPER – BAR-OZ, Armenian Graffito from Shivta = Y. T CHEKHANOVETS – Y. TEPPER – G. BAR-OZ, TheArmenianGraffitofrom theSouthernChurchofShivta, in RevueBiblique, 124 (2017), p. 446-454. TZAFERIS – BIJOVSKY, New Archaeological Finds from Kursi-Gergesa = V. TZAFERIS – G. BIJOVSKY, NewArchaeologicalFindsfromKursi-Gergesa, in ‘Atiqot, 79 (2014), p. 175-197. ARMENIANS IN THE NEGEV 135

URMAN, Nessana= D. URMAN, Nessana, in TheNewEncyclopediaofArchaeological ExcavationsintheHolyLand, Vol. 5 (Suppl.), Jerusalem, 2008, p. 1976-1981. URMAN, NessanaExcavations1987-1995 = D. URMAN, NessanaExcavations1987- 1995, in D. URMAN (ed.), Nessana: Excavations and Studies (Beer-Sheva: StudiesbytheDepartmentofBibleandAncientNearEast,17), Beer-Sheva, 2004, p. 1-118. VIKAN, EarlyChristianandByzantineRings = G. VIKAN, EarlyChristianand ByzantineRingsintheZuckerFamilyCollection, in TheJournalofthe WaltersArtGallery, 45 (1987), p. 32-43. VIKAN, TwoByzantineAmuleticArmbands = G. VIKAN, TwoByzantineAmuletic ArmbandsandtheGrouptowhichTheyBelong, in TheJournaloftheWalters ArtGallery, 49/50 (1991/1992), p. 33-51. WILKINSON, JerusalemPilgrims = J. WILKINSON, JerusalemPilgrimsbeforethe Crusades,Warminster, 1977. WESTENHOLZ, ImagesofInspiration = J.G. WESTENHOLZ, ImagesofInspiration: TheOldTestamentinEarlyChristianArt,Jerusalem, 2000. ZALESSKAYA,MonumentsofByzantineAppliedArts = V.N. ZALESSKAYA, Monuments ofByzantineAppliedArts,4th-7thCenturies.CatalogueoftheHermitage Collection, St. Petersburg, 2006.

The Hebrew University Michael E. STONE 74 Shmaryahu Levin St. Jerusalem 96664, Israel [email protected]

Israel Antiquities Authority Yana TCHEKHANOVETS P.O.B. 586, Jerusalem, Israel [email protected]

The Hebrew University Ofer POGORELSKY P.O.B. 404 (Mandel Building), Jerusalem, Israel [email protected]

Abstract—The paper discusses two unpublished Armenian finds from 1930s excavations at Nessana in the Negev Desert: a graffito written on stone and an incised finger-ring, both dated, on the basis of palaeography and style (respectively), to around the seventh century. This Armenian presence in Nessana is explained as part of the pilgrim traffic through the Negev to Mount Sinai. The finds bear his- torical significance in several aspects: first, they fill in a missing link between the known epigraphical traces of pilgrims from Jerusalem, and Nazareth and the ones from the Sinai, whereby they further illustrate the Armenian participation in Holy Land pilgrimage. Second, the finds underline the central role of Nessana as a hub of pilgrim traffic in the Negev, attested also by other sources. Moreover, they contribute to our understanding of Nessana’s layout by reinforcing the claim that following the dismantlement of Nessana’s military unit the fort was turned into a hospice. 136 O. POGORELSKY – M.E. STONE – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS

Fig. 1. Plan of Byzantine Nessana. After NEGEV, Nessana.

Fig. 2. The Armenian graffito inscription. Courtesy of Israel Antiquities Authority. ARMENIANS IN THE NEGEV 137

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 3. Metal finds from Nessana: the finger-ring with Armenian inscription is on the right. Rockefeller Museum Archive, Inv. No. 36.1341. Courtesy of Israel Antiquities Authority.

Fig. 4. Stamp print made from the finger-ring with Armenian inscription. Courtesy of Israel Antiquities Authority.