&HZQUJBOCanaanite Relations in the Middle and -BUF#SPO[F"HFTBT3FGMFDUFECZ4DBSBCT1
Daphna Ben-Tor
Abstract ies dealing with these scarabs have focused on the first half of the sec- At all times, Egyptian-Canaanite relations ond millennium.3 A comprehensive reflected political developments in both study of the period encompassing regions, and were therefore never static but an ongoing process. The second millen- the New Kingdom in Egypt and nium BCE saw two crucial developments the Late Bronze Age in Palestine occurring respectively in the Middle and has yet to be published, and our Late Bronze Ages. The first is a gradual knowledge of scarabs of this period infiltration and settlement of Canaanites is therefore preliminary and par- in the eastern Delta, which resulted in the tial.4 Nevertheless, it is still possible presence of a highly Egyptianized Canaan- ite Middle Bronze culture in this region, Tufnell, “‘Hyksos’ Scarabs from Canaan”; and the rule of a dynasty of Canaanite Tufnell, Scarabs and Their Contribution; origin in northern Egypt. The second is Schroer, “Der Mann im Wulstsaumman- a long-lasting Egyptian empire in Canaan tel”; Keel, Studien zu den Stempelsiegeln aus with military and administrative presence. Palästina/Israel IV, 203-25; Keel, Corpus This paper will attempt to show that scar- der Stempelsiegel-Amulette; Ward, “Scarab abs provide key evidence for the under- Typology and Archaeological Context”; standing of Egyptian-Canaanite relations Ward and Dever, Scarab Typology and in the second millennium BCE, stressing Archaeological Context; Weinstein, “Egypt the differences between the Middle and and the Middle Bronze IIC/Late Bronze Late Bronze Ages. IA Transition in Palestine”; Weinstein, “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”; Ben-Tor, “The Historical Implications”; Ben-Tor, “The The potential contribution of the Relations Between Egypt and Palestine in nd large number of scarabs from 2 the Middle Kingdom”; Ben-Tor, “Egyp- millennium contexts in Egypt and tian-Levantine Relations and Chronology the Levant has long been realized, in the Middle Bronze Age”; Ben-Tor, Scar- especially for research of Egyptian abs, Chronology and Interconnections. 3 Canaanite relations.2 Most stud- See the publications noted above, which include additional bibliography. 1 I am very grateful to James Weinstein, 4 For studies of particular scarabs of this Ruhama Bonfil, and Ezra Marcus for read- period, see e.g. Jaeger, Scarabée Menkhéper- ing the manuscript and offering helpful rê; Keel, “Der Ägyptische Gott Ptah”; remarks. Uehlinger, “Der Amun-Tempel Ramses’ 2 E.g. Giveon, “Royal Seals of the XIIth III in pA-Knan”; Wiese, Zum Bild des Dynasty from Western Asia”; Giveon, Königs; Brandl, “The Cape Gelidonya The Impact of Egypt on Canaan, 73-107; Shipwreck Scarabs”; Brandl, “Scarabs and 24 DAPHNA BEN-TOR to present a general picture of the exceptions are two scarabs from a implications of scarabs from the salvage excavation of a poorly pre- Middle and Late Bronze Ages in served MBIIA tomb in the Qirya the southern Levant. quarter of Tel Aviv,10 but the exact Scarabs were the most popular phase of the MBIIA in which they form of amulet in ancient Egypt5 were found is uncertain, and the and for a short period of time context of these scarabs may also be they were also used as seals for later than their date of production. the central administration.6 Their The earliest securely dated evi- initial production was in the First dence for the use of scarabs in Pa- Intermediate Period,7 and not too lestine is a group of some 50 clay long afterwards, once the land was sealings from mid MBIIA contexts reunited in the early Middle King- at Ashkelon,11 a find that is so far dom, they were first exported out- unique outside the Nile valley. side of Egypt. The exportation of These sealings, which sealed various scarabs was not only an expression containers, were stamped with late of Egyptian commercial contacts, Middle Kingdom Egyptian scarabs but also a manifestation of Egyp- dating mainly from the 13th Dynas- tian cultural influence. Egyptian ty. Identical in every respect to seal- scarabs of the early Middle King- ings from late Middle Kingdom dom have been found at Byblos administrative units in Egypt and and on the island of Crete, reflect- Lower Nubia, the Ashkelon sealings ing Egypt’s commercial and cul- display a distinctive late Middle tural contacts with both regions Kingdom administrative practice.12 during this period.8 Isolated early The 13th Dynasty date indicated by Middle Kingdom scarabs were also their designs was assigned also to found in Palestine, but they come their contexts, as the pottery associ- exclusively from later archaeologi- ated with them has parallels in the cal contexts.9 The only possible Canaanite pottery from stratum G Plaques Bearing Royal Names from the 99 – see Ben-Tor, Scarabs, Chronology, and Early 20th Dynasty.” Interconnections, 15; Keel, Corpus, Band 5 Hornung and Staehelin, Skarabäen I, 82-83, no. 15 – see Ben-Tor, Scarabs, aus Basler Sammlungen; Ward, Pre-12th Chronology, and Interconnections, 118. Dynasty Scarab Amulets; Keel, Corpus der 10 Excavated by E. van den Brink and E. Stempelsiegel-Amulette. Braun (Ben-Tor, forthcoming). 6 Ben-Tor, Scarabs, Chronology and Inter- 11 Cohen, Canaanites, Chronology, and connections, 5-9 with bibliography. Connections, 130-31; Stager, “The MBIIA 7 Ward, Pre-12th Dynasty Scarab Amulets. Ceramic Sequence at Tel Ashkelon,” 353; 8 Ben-Tor, “The Absolute Date of the Ben-Tor, Scarabs, Chronology, and Inter- Montet Jar Scarabs”; Ben-Tor, “Early connections, 117-18. Egyptian Scarabs on Crete.” 12 Ben-Tor, Scarabs, Chronology, and 9 E.g. Keel, Corpus, Band I, 138-39, no. Interconnections, 5-9 with bibliography.