ARMENIANS 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 Israel, 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. Travel Routes to Sinai
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, Excavations at Nessana. 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 Jerusalem. 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 Yerevan 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, Armenian Graffito from Shivta. 4 Traditionally identified with Jebel Musa in southern Sinai. 5 This role is attested both by epigraphic evidence from the Sinai Peninsula: STONE, Armenian Inscriptions from Sinai, and by literary evidence: STONE, Holy Land Pilgrimage, 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 Palestine, for this is the relevant geographical context
Le Muséon 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 De situ Terrae Sanctae (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 en route 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 (xenodochium sancti Georgii). 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, Pilgrim Routes; STONE, Armenian Inscriptions from Sinai, p. 36-52; DAHARI, Monastic Settlements, p. 9-15. Very insightful information can now also be found in STONE, Uncovering Ancient Footprints. 8 GEYER, Itinera Hierosolymitana, p. 148 (§ 27). For an English translation, see WILKINSON, Jerusalem Pilgrims, p. 70. 9 GEYER, Itinera Hierosolymitana, p. 181-183 (§§ 34-36). For an English translation, see WILKINSON, Jerusalem Pilgrims, p. 85-87. 10 See MAYERSON, Desert of Southern Palestine, 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, Desert of Southern Palestine, p. 170-171. For the arguments in favor of Mizpe Shivta, see FIGUERAS, The Location of Xenodochium Sancti Georgii. 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. Archaeological Context
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 (Arabic: 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-Literary Papyri, 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, Nessana Excavations 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. The Graffito Inscription
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-Literary Papyri, p. 5-6. 18 COLT, Excavations at Nessana, p. 17. 19 KRAEMER, Non-Literary Papyri, p. 5, dates this event to the 580s. 20 COLT, Excavations at Nessana, p. 17. 21 MAYERSON, Desert of Southern Palestine, 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[
Normalized Transcription: 1. Ես Կորիւն գրեցի 2. որ անցանէ յիշեցէ[
Translation: 1. I Koriwn wrote (this) 2. He who passes by, let him remember (me).
Notes on Readings and Interpretations 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 Life of Maštoc‘ 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-ring with Armenian Inscription
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- nian Inscriptions from Nazareth. I also consulted the letter tables in STONE – KOUYMJIAN – LEHMANN, Album of Armenian Paleography. This work is referred to as AAP. Finally, the table in STONE, Armenian Inscriptions from Sinai, 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, Excavations at Nessana, p. 53. 25 STONE, Armenian Inscriptions from Nazareth, p. 321 (N Arm 2). 26 STONE, Armenian Inscriptions from Sinai, p. 118 (H Arm 26), p. 152 (H Arm 65). 27 ROSS, Catalogue of the Byzantine and Early Mediaeval Antiquities, p. 53, no. 59; Pl. XLI. 28 RAHMANI, Byzantine Brass Rings, p. 179. 29 VIKAN, Early Christian and Byzantine Rings, 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, Catalogue of Early Christian Antiquities, p. 7, no. 40. 32 TZAFERIS – BIJOVSKY, New Archaeological Finds from Kursi-Gergesa, p. 191, fig. 18:2. 33 AMORAI-STARK – HERSHKOVITZ, Ancient Gems, Finger Rings and Seal Boxes, p. 394- 396, no. 415, dated to the fifth-sixth centuries. 34 SPIER, Early Christian Gems, 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 Armenian Objects from Jerusalem, p. 501-503. 36 RAHMANI, Byzantine Solomon Eulogia Tokens. 37 RAHMANI, Byzantine Brass Rings, p. 177-178 ; VIKAN, Two Byzantine Amuletic 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 Armenia 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, Monuments of Byzantine Applied Arts, p. 89, no. 102. 39 ROSS, Catalogue of the Byzantine and Early Mediaeval Antiquities, 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, Monuments of Byzantine Applied Arts, p. 89. 42 KHURSHUDIAN – AKOPIAN, Sasanian Golden Ring. 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, Early Medieval Bullae of Dvin, 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, Christian Seals of the Sasanian Period. 45 In addition to the finds from Dvin, see LORDKIPANIDZE, Gemmy Gosudarstvennogo Museia Gruzii, p. 92, no. 61 for Georgia, and GADJIEV, Attribution of Gem-Seal, discussing the only attributed seal of the great Catholicos of Albania, inscribed in Middle Persian. For episcopal rings, see DALTON, Catalogue of the Finger Rings, p. XXXIV-XXXVI. 46 KALANTARIAN, Early Medieval Bullae of Dvin, 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, Հայոց Անձանունների Բառարան (Dictionary of Armenian Proper Names), 5 Vols., Beirut, 1972 (Armenian). AMORAI-STARK – HERSHKOVITZ, Ancient Gems, Finger Rings and Seal Boxes = S. AMORAI-STARK – M. HERSHKOVITZ, Ancient Gems, Finger Rings and Seal Boxes from Caesarea Maritima, Tel Aviv, 2015. CIIP = Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaeae/Palaestinae: A Multi-Lingual Corpus of the Inscriptions from Alexander to Muhammad, 4 Vols., Berlin, 2010-2018. COLT, Excavations at Nessana = H.D. COLT, Excavations at Nessana, Vol. 1, London, 1962.
47 STONE, Armenian Inscriptions from Sinai. For inscriptions in other languages, mainly Greek and Nabatean, see NEGEV, Inscriptions of Wadi Haggag. 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, Rock Inscriptions and Graffiti Project. 48 STONE, Oldest Armenian Pilgrim Inscription (also in CIIP I no. 810a). For the archae- ological context of the inscription, see REICH – SHUKRON, Western Extramural Quarter. Other inscriptions: STONE – BEN-AMI – TCHEKHANOVETS, New Armenian Inscriptions; STONE – BEN-AMI – TCHEKHANOVETS, Armenian Graffito. 49 STONE, Rock Inscriptions, under site name: Church of the Nativity; CIIP IV no. 3227. 50 STONE, Armenian Inscriptions from Nazareth; STONE – VAN LINT – NAZARIAN, Further Armenian Inscriptions. ARMENIANS IN THE NEGEV 133
DAHARI, Monastic Settlements = U. DAHARI, Monastic Settlements in Southern Sinai in the Byzantine Period: The Archaeological Remains (IAA Reports, 9), Jerusalem, 2000. DALTON, Catalogue of Early Christian Antiquities = O.M. DALTON, Catalogue of Early Christian Antiquities and Objects from the Christian East in the Department of British and Mediaeval Antiquities and Ethnography of the British Museum, London, 1901. DALTON, Catalogue of the Finger Rings = O.M. DALTON, Catalogue of the Finger Rings. Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediaeval and Later, London, 1912. FIGUERAS, The Location of Xenodochium Sancti Georgii = P. FIGUERAS, The Location of Xenodochium Sancti Georgii in the Light of two Inscriptions in Mizpe Shivta, in ARAM, 19 (2007), p. 509-526. GADJIEV, Attribution of Gem-Seal = M.S. GADJIEV, Attribution of a Gem-Seal of the Great Catholicos of Albania and Balasacan and the Matter of Proper Sequence in Patriarchate among Albanian Church Sovereigns, in Problemy istorii, filologii, kultury, 14 (2004), p. 465-479. GEYER, Itinera Hierosolymitana = P. GEYER, Itinera Hierosolymitana (Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, 39), Vienna, 1898. KALANTARIAN, Early Medieval Bullae of Dvin = A.A. KALANTARIAN, Early Medieval Bullae of Dvin, Yerevan, 1982. KHURSHUDIAN – AKOPIAN, Sasanian Golden Ring = E. KHURSHUDIAN – N. AKOPIAN, The Sasanian Golden Ring with an Ancient Armenian Inscription, in Zan- gak, 97 (1999), p. 182-187. KRAEMER, Non-Literary Papyri = K.J. KRAEMER, Non-Literary Papyri (Excavations at Nessana, III), Princeton, NJ, 1958. LERNER, Christian Seals of the Sasanian Period = J.A. LERNER, Christian Seals of the Sasanian Period, Istanbul, 1977. LORDKIPANIDZE, Gemmy Gosudarstvennogo Museia Gruzii = M. LORDKIPANIDZE, Gemmy Gosudarstvennogo Museia Gruzii, Vol. I, Tbilisi, 1954. MAYERSON, Desert of Southern Palestine = P. MAYERSON, The Desert of Southern Palestine according to Byzantine Sources, in Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 107 (1963), p. 160-172. MAYERSON, Pilgrim Routes = P. MAYERSON, The Pilgrim Routes to Mount Sinai and the Armenians, in Israel Exploration Journal, 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 New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, Vol. 3, Jerusalem, 1993, p. 1145-1149. RAHMANI, Byzantine Brass Rings = L.I. RAHMANI, On some Byzantine Brass Rings in the State Collection, in ‘Atiqot, 17 (1985), p. 168–181. RAHMANI, Byzantine Solomon Eulogia Tokens = L.I. RAHMANI, The Byzantine 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, The Western Extramural Quarter of Byzantine Jerusalem, in M.E. STONE – R. ERVINE – N. STONE (eds.), The Armenians in Jerusalem and the Holy Land (Hebrew University Armenian Studies, 4), Leuven – Paris – Sterling, VA, 2002, p. 193-201. 134 O. POGORELSKY – M.E. STONE – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS
ROSS, Catalogue of the Byzantine and Early Mediaeval Antiquities = M.C. ROSS, Catalogue of the Byzantine and Early Mediaeval Antiquities in the Dum- barton Oaks Collection, Vol. II. Jewelry, Enamels, and Art of the Migration Period, Washington, DC, 1965. SPIER, Early Christian Gems = J. SPIER, Late Antique and Early Christian Gems (Spätantike-Frühes Christentum-Byzanz Kunst im Ersten Jahrtausend, Reihe B. Studien und Perspektiven, 20), Wiesbaden, 2007. STONE, Armenian Inscriptions from Nazareth = M.E. STONE, Armenian Inscriptions of the Fifth Century from Nazareth, in Revue des Études Arméniennes, 22 (1990-1991), p. 315-322. STONE, Armenian Inscriptions from Sinai = M.E. STONE, The Armenian Inscrip- tions from the Sinai, with Appendixes on the Georgian and Latin Inscrip- tions by M. VAN ESBROECK and W. ADLER (Harvard Armenian Texts and Studies, 6), Cambridge, MA, 1982. STONE, Holy Land Pilgrimage = M.E. STONE, Holy Land Pilgrimage of Armenians before the Arab Conquest, in Revue Biblique, 93 (1986), p. 93-110. STONE, Oldest Armenian Pilgrim Inscription = M.E. STONE, The Oldest Armenian Pilgrim Inscription from Jerusalem, in Sion, 71 (1997), p. 340-349. STONE, Rock Inscriptions = M.E. STONE (ed.), Rock Inscriptions and Graffiti Project: Catalogue of Inscriptions, Vols. 1-3 (Society of Biblical Literature. Resources for Biblical Studies, 28, 29, 31), Atlanta, GA, 1992-1994. STONE, Rock Inscriptions and Graffiti Project = M.E. STONE, The Rock Inscrip- tions and Graffiti Project of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in Com- parative Oriental Manuscript Studies Bulletin, 1 (2015), p. 52-57. STONE, Three Armenian Objects from Jerusalem = M.E. STONE, Three Armenian Objects from Jerusalem, in Revue des Études Arméniennes, 28 (2001-2002), p. 501-507. STONE, Uncovering Ancient Footprints = M.E. STONE, Uncovering Ancient Foot- prints: Armenian Inscriptions and the Pilgrimage Routes of the Sinai, Atlanta, GA, 2017. STONE – BEN-AMI – TCHEKHANOVETS, Armenian Graffito = M.E. STONE – D. BEN-AMI – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS, Armenian Graffito from the City of David, Jerusalem, in Revue des Études Arméniennes, 37 (2016-2017), p. 283- 286. STONE – BEN-AMI – TCHEKHANOVETS, New Armenian Inscriptions = M.E. STONE – D. BEN-AMI – Y. TCHEKHANOVETS, New Armenian Inscriptions from the City of David, Jerusalem, in Journal of the Society for Armenian Studies, 23 (2014), p. 149-152. STONE – KOUYMJIAN – LEHMANN, Album of Armenian Paleography = M.E. STONE – D. KOUYMJIAN – H. LEHMANN, Album of Armenian Paleography, Aarhus, 2002. STONE – VAN LINT – NAZARIAN, Further Armenian Inscriptions = M.E. STONE – T.M. VAN LINT – J. NAZARIAN, Further Armenian Inscriptions from Nazareth, in Revue des Études Arméniennes, 26 (1996), p. 321-337. TCHEKHANOVETS – TEPPER – BAR-OZ, Armenian Graffito from Shivta = Y. T CHEKHANOVETS – Y. TEPPER – G. BAR-OZ, The Armenian Graffito from the Southern Church of Shivta, in Revue Biblique, 124 (2017), p. 446-454. TZAFERIS – BIJOVSKY, New Archaeological Finds from Kursi-Gergesa = V. TZAFERIS – G. BIJOVSKY, New Archaeological Finds from Kursi-Gergesa, in ‘Atiqot, 79 (2014), p. 175-197. ARMENIANS IN THE NEGEV 135
URMAN, Nessana = D. URMAN, Nessana, in The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, Vol. 5 (Suppl.), Jerusalem, 2008, p. 1976-1981. URMAN, Nessana Excavations 1987-1995 = D. URMAN, Nessana Excavations 1987- 1995, in D. URMAN (ed.), Nessana: Excavations and Studies (Beer-Sheva: Studies by the Department of Bible and Ancient Near East, 17), Beer-Sheva, 2004, p. 1-118. VIKAN, Early Christian and Byzantine Rings = G. VIKAN, Early Christian and Byzantine Rings in the Zucker Family Collection, in The Journal of the Walters Art Gallery, 45 (1987), p. 32-43. VIKAN, Two Byzantine Amuletic Armbands = G. VIKAN, Two Byzantine Amuletic Armbands and the Group to which They Belong, in The Journal of the Walters Art Gallery, 49/50 (1991/1992), p. 33-51. WILKINSON, Jerusalem Pilgrims = J. WILKINSON, Jerusalem Pilgrims before the Crusades, Warminster, 1977. WESTENHOLZ, Images of Inspiration = J.G. WESTENHOLZ, Images of Inspiration: The Old Testament in Early Christian Art, Jerusalem, 2000. ZALESSKAYA, Monuments of Byzantine Applied Arts = V.N. ZALESSKAYA, Monuments of Byzantine Applied Arts, 4th-7th Centuries. Catalogue of the Hermitage 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, Bethlehem 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.