ARAM, 8 (1996), 89-99 89

THE KING’S HIGHWAY, THE DESERT HIGHWAY, AND CENTRAL ’S KERAK PLATEAU

GERALD L. MATTINGLY

According to the , sought permission from the Edomite and Amorite kings for the Hebrews to pass through their territories on the Transjordanian plateau, Num. 20:17 records Moses’ appeal to the king of : “Now let us pass through your land. We will not pass through field or vineyard, neither will we drink water from a well; we will go along the King’s Highway, we will not turn aside to the right hand or to the left, until we have passed through your territory.”1 The same appeal was made to Sihon, king of the Amorites, who ruled the region north of Wadi Mujib (the biblical Arnon): “Let me pass through your land; we will not turn aside into field or vineyard; we will not drink the water of a well; we will go by the King’s Highway, until we have passed through your terri- tory” (21:22). In the last part of the ninth century B.C., the Mesha Inscription noted that this Moabite king was vitally interested in the strategic road network of his ter- ritory. Mesha’s kingdom was located on the same stretch of the - ian highlands as visited by Moses’ followers. In line 26 of his famous memo- rial stone, King Mesha boasted: “I carried out repairs at , and I mended the highway at the Arnon.”2 One of the best known Roman milestones from Trajan’s Via Nova, constructed between A.D. 111-114,3 reported how this emperor “having reduced Arabia to the status of a province, opened up and paved a new road, through the agency of the emperor’s legate C. Claudius Severus, from the boundaries of as far as the Red Sea.”4 Like the texts mentioned above, this Latin text reflects the impor- tance of the ancient route that ran north-south across the tableland of central Jor- dan. The general purpose of this paper is to examine the various roads that have, in fact, made the Kerak plateau, the district between the Mujib and Wadi el-Hesa, a strategic crossroads for the history and culture of Transjordan – and for the Lev- ant as a whole. More specifically, I will draw attention to a natural corridor in the

1 All biblical citations in this paper come from the Revised Standard Version. 2 J.C.L. Gibson, Textbook of Syrian Semitic Inscriptions, Volume I: Hebrew and Moabite Inscriptions, (Oxford, 1971), 77. On p. 82, Gibson notes that this “reference is to the portion of the King’s Highway which passed over the Arnon close to Aroer….” 3 B. Beitzel, et al., “Roads and Highways,” in D.N. Freedman et al. (eds.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 5, (New York, 1992), 783. 4 L. Keppie, Understanding Roman Inscriptions, (Baltimore, 1991), 69. 90 KING'S HIGHWAY, DESERT HIGHWAY, CENTRAL JORDAN'S KERAK PLATEAU southeastern corner of the plateau and discuss a new archaeological project which will investigate the significance of this route.

EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR THE THE STUDY OF ANCIENT ROUTES

In his monumental study, The Roads and Highways of Ancient ,5 David Dorsey has presented a wealth of material on the road system of Iron Age Israel. The methodology used in this reconstruction is as important as the final product, and – as Joffe suggested in a recent review – it is hoped that someone will produce a similar analysis of Transjordan’s Iron Age roads.6 My paper presents some preliminary information toward that end, a hint of what awaits some patient scholar, but I have considered most of the same factors in this survey of roads in the Kerak region. After he considered a number of issues under the heading “The Nature of Roads in Ancient Israel” (a 51-page chapter), Dorsey supplemented Aha- roni’s7 list of resources that are important in reconstructing “bygone roads.” Dorsey names four kinds of resources: (1) historical sources; (2) archaeology; (3) later routes; and (4) geographical and topographical conditions.8 For our purposes, the historical sources include the Bible, Egyptian and Assyrian sources, ancient maps, Roman milestones, and accounts by early travelers. Of course, in any discussion of roads the topography plays a primary role, and – as Aharoni noted – the “broken landscape” in and Transjordan lim- its the routes available to travelers.9 I would suggest that Israel Roll, an author- ity on the Roman roads in this region, offers a valuable set of criteria by which we can think about roads from the ancient perspective. He identifies six factors which contributed to the construction of roads in antiquity: (1) natural geo- graphic factors (e.g., terrain, type of soil and rock, water sources); (2) human geographic factors (i.e., population distribution and density); (3) economic factors; (4) geo-political factors (which dictated the purpose of the road net- work, the routes followed, and the resources invested in its construction and maintenance); (5) the region’s geographical location; and (6) the means of travel and level of technology.10 With this set of criteria in mind, let us turn

5 D.A. Dorsey, The Roads and Highways of Ancient Israel, (Baltimore, 1991). This volume is the published version of Dorsey’s Ph.D. dissertation, which was completed at Dropsie University in 1981. 6 A.H. Joffe, Review of David A. Dorsey’s The Roads and Highways of Ancient Israel, Jour- nal of Near Eastern Studies, 54/3 (July 1995), 232-234. 7 Y. Aharoni, The Land of the Bible: A Historical Geography, rev. ed. (revised and translated by A. F. Rainey), (Philadelphia, 1979), 45. 8 Dorsey, Roads and Highways, 52-56. 9 Aharoni, Land of the Bible, 43. 10 I. Roll, “The Roman Road System in Judaea,” in L. A. Levine (ed.), The Jerusalem Cathe- dra, Vol. 3, (Detroit, 1983), 137-138. G.L. MATTINGLY 91 our attention to the function of Jordan in the trade and travel network of the Near East.

JORDAN AND CENTRAL JORDAN – CROSSROADS OF NEAR EASTERN TRAVEL

The title of Peter Gubser’s popular study of the Hashemite Kingdom, Jor- dan – Crossroads of Middle Eastern Events,11 is a fair representation of the importance attached to the region included in the modern nation of Jordan. Though it never achieved the sophistication of the great ancient Near Eastern centers of power and culture, this territory has played a vital role in the trans- port of products and troops and the dissemination of ideas down through the ages. The Transjordan has provided passage to goods and people through such activities as trade (ancient and modern), warfare, and pilgrimage. Another book on modern Jordan, this one written by Kamal Salibi,12 pro- vides a good overview of the routes which have contributed to this region’s economic significance, from ancient until modern times. Salibi observes that the highlands of Palestine merge with Sinai and were oriented in the direction of Egypt, while the highlands of Transjordan merge with the mountains of the Hijaz in Western Arabia. Thus, Palestine is the “natural point of connection between Syria and Egypt,” and Transjordan is the “natural point of connection between Syria and Arabia.” Travelers going to Syria and Arabia, respectively, spoke of the territory of present-day Jordan as masharif al-Sham (“the approaches of Syria”) and masharif al-Hijaz (“the approaches of the Hijaz”). Ancient caravaneers “followed the natural configurations of the land in differ- ent areas to reach their Syrian destinations.” One important trail passed through the Wadi Sirhan, while others converged on Ma{an to form a major line of travel, the so-called “King’s Highway,” which continued northward through Transjordan’s hills into Syria.13 In one of the classic studies on Transjordan’s history and archaeology, The Other Side of the Jordan, Nelson Glueck had, in fact, already drawn attention to this east-of-the-Rift-Valley orientation. His language was less sophisticated than that of Salibi, but Glueck was making the same assessment when he observed that “the orientation of Edom, , , and , for eco- nomic and geographical reasons may be said to be chiefly to the north and south rather than to the west, that is mainly to Syria and Arabia rather than to Palestine.”14 This hypothesis has been tested through much archaeological research, where the realia of the ancient world meet the literary evidence, but

11 P. Gubser, Jordan–Crossroads of Middle Eastern Events, (London, 1983). 12 K. Salibi, The Modern History of Jordan, (New York, 1993). 13 Salibi, History of Jordan, 6-7. 14 N. Glueck, The Other Side of the Jordan, rev. ed., (Cambridge, MA, 1970), 180-181. 92 KING'S HIGHWAY, DESERT HIGHWAY, CENTRAL JORDAN'S KERAK PLATEAU there is a need for further explicit inquiry into the nature of cultural and mate- rial exchange between Syria, Jordan, and Arabia.15 Of course, the South Arabian trade has been the subject of a number of tex- tually-oriented studies, including those Van Beek,16 Groom,17 and Crone.18 In his discussion of the role of trade in Iron Age Edom’s political development, Bienkowski reminds us that “the question of the Arabian trade is a tricky one,” since “real evidence for the actual routes of the Arabian trade… comes almost entirely from later written sources.”19 In his classic article on the routes of Arabian luxury trade, Van Beek, always the cautious scholar, states cate- gorically “although not specifically mentioned in the literature, one branch must have followed the ‘king’s highway’ through Transjordan, and another route probably branched off at Teima, en route to Mesopotamia.”20 And on the basis of another kind of evidence, a comparison of the ceramic traditions from ancient Edom and Northwest Arabia, Parr finds merit in the suggestion that Northwest Arabia was an “integral part” of “greater Edom.”21 In the texts we read at the beginning of this paper, it became obvious that central Jordan was a crossroads for many centuries in antiquity. The strategic military and commercial function of Kerak, in central Jordan, was also obvi- ous to the Crusaders, whose 12th-century citadel, “Pierre du Désert,” was piv- otal in the defense of the Latin Kingdom.22 Naturally, the Ayyubids held Kerak of Moab in high regard; and Kerak’s strategic position was fully appre- ciated by the Mamluks, when this city – by the late 13th century – served as capital of their provinces.23 [It is, by the way, important to recall that the first battle between the Muslim and Byzantine armies was fought on the Kerak plateau, at Mu’ta in 629.] Rafat el Majali and Abdul Rahim Mas’ad have drawn attention to the sig- nificance of the Kerak district in both the caravan and the Hajj traffic during

15 See, for example, the work of R.H. Dornemann, The Archaeology of the Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages, (Milwaukee, 1983); P.J. Parr, “Pottery of the Late Second Millennium B.C. from North West Arabia and Its Historical Interpretations,” in D.T. Potts (ed.), Araby the Blest: Studies in Arabian Archaeology, (Copenhagen, 1988), 73-89; P. J. Parr, “Edom and the ,” in P. Bienkowski (ed.), Early Edom: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan, (Sheffield, 1992), 41-46. 16 G.W. Van Beek, “Frankincense and Myrrh,” in D.N. Freedman, and E.F. Campbell Jr., (eds.), The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, 2, (Garden City, NY, 1964). 17 N. Groom, Frankincense and Myrrh, (London, 1981). 18 P. Crone, Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam, (Princeton, NJ, 1987). 19 P. Bienkowski, “The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan: A Framework,” in P. Bienkowski, (ed.), Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan, (Sheffield, 1992), 9. 20 Van Beek, “Frankincense and Myrrh,” 107. 21 P.J. Parr, “Contacts between North West Arabia and Jordan in the Late Bronze and Iron Ages,” in Hadidi, A. (ed.), Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I, (, 1982), 132. 22 S. Runciman, A History of the Crusades, Vol. 2, (New York, 1965), 230. 23 J. Riley-Smith, (ed.), The Atlas of the Crusades, (New York, 1990), 108-109. G.L. MATTINGLY 93 the Mamluk Sultanate. Travelers making the Hajj arrived in Jordan from Syria, Persia, and Northern Iraq and passed through – among other places – Kerak, Hasa, and Maan on their way to Medina and Mecca. And Kerak, Mu’ta, and other towns on the plateau served the commercial caravans that crisscrossed Transjordan between Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Iraq, and the Arabian Penin- sula.24 There can be no question that Jordan, including the ancient Moabite ter- ritory, played a major role in international economic and political activities for many centuries.

THE KERAK PLATEAU, THE KING'S HIGHWAY, AND THE DESERT HIGHWAY

Much of the land between the Mujib and the Hesa is conducive to farming, but it is clear that this region’s historical importance is related to its position on the north-south routes, well known lines of travel known commonly today as the “King’s Highway” and the “Desert Highway.” These two highways run parallel from Maan to a point just south of Amman, one of several reasons why Amman played such a pivotal role in this region’s history. Aharoni pointed to the simple reality behind the fame of these two routes: “The topog- raphy of Transjordan limits the possibilities for north-south movement to two parallel lines.”25 The topographical facts are obvious, but we are less certain about the early history of trade and travel on these two roads; and the pre- Roman names of these routes have been the subject of an interesting, still unsettled debate. In the study of Jordan’s historical geography, history, and archaeology, especially when these disciplines are related to biblical history, few place- names are better known than the so-called “King’s Highway.” This term, which is a translation of the Hebrew derek hammelek (Num. 20:17; 21:22; cf. Deut. 2:27), has an interesting history in and of itself – apart from the actual road or route. The translation debate hinges upon how one should understand the phrase – as a proper name (i.e., the name of a specific road) or as a generic noun (i.e., in the appellative sense – and used to refer to var- ious roads). Miller observed that “earlier commentators generally under- stood derek hammelek in the appellative sense”… and it appears that the identification of this road as “the proper name for a single major highway which led north-south through Moab and Edom originated with Glueck.” Glueck advocated this view because he was convinced that he had located a line of Iron Age settlements that pointed to a single Transjordanian route;

24 R. El Majali, and A.R. Mas’ad, “Trade and Trade Routes in Jordan in the Mamluke Era (AS 1250-1516),” in A. Hadidi, (ed.), Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan III, (Amman, 1987), 311-314. This is an important essay, since it provides information on a neglected period in the history of trade, but it lacks documentation. 25 Aharoni, Land of the Bible, 54. 94 KING'S HIGHWAY, DESERT HIGHWAY, CENTRAL JORDAN'S KERAK PLATEAU

Miller is correct in asserting that no such obvious line of settlements existed in Moab during the Iron Age.26 Glueck identified the line of march followed by the kings in Genesis 14 with the same route as the derek hammelek in Numbers, the Via Nova Tra- iana, and the modern automobile road that runs through the middle of the plateau Admittedly, Glueck sounds fairly certain about this identification as he asserts: “It may be accepted as axiomatic, that from the very dawn of his- tory in Transjordan this central track through the country was always the main line of march.27 Glueck’s authoritative interpretation was widely accepted,28 until Oded suggested that the term derek hammelek could be identified with the Assyrian use of harran sarri – a generic reference to a main highway.29 Dorsey has recently presented a more persuasive linguistic argument to sup- port the generic translation of derek hammelek: The expression is so understood by the Vulgate in Num. 20:17: via publica (con- tra Num. 21:22, via regia). Moreover, in later and modern Hebrew derek ham- melek means “main highway” (see, for example, Sanh. 2:4). The cognate expres- sions KASKAL LUGAL and harran sarri in Sumerian and Akkadian occur so frequently that they likewise must be taken, not as the actual proper names given to various roads throughout all parts of Mesopotamia, but rather as descriptive terms… The Aramaic equivalent is used much the same way….30 So Dorsey came to the same conclusion as Aharoni had proposed in the 1979 edition of Land of the Bible (p. 54), i.e., derek hammelek is a descriptive term meaning “main road,” “public road,” or simply “highway.” At the same time, both acknowledge that the general line of the modern “King’s Highway,” the

26 J.M. Miller, “Recent Archaeological Developments Relevant to Ancient Moab,” in A. Hadidi, (ed.), Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I, (Amman, 1982), 173; “Moab and the Moabites,” in A. Dearman, (ed.), Studies in the Mesha Inscription and Moab, (Atlanta, 1989), 12-13; cf. J.R. Kautz, III, in G.W. Bromiley, et al. (eds.), The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, rev. ed., Vol. 3, (Grand Rapids, MI, 1986). In fact, the Miller- Pinkerton Archaeological Survey of the Kerak Plateau did not find that many settlements were situated along the modern road, which is normally thought to run along the same line as the ancient route. The widespread distribution of sites points to the fact that water and farmland played more important roles in determining regional settlement patterns; cf. G. L. Mattingly, “Settlement Patterns and Sociocultural Reconstruction,” in J. F. Drinkard, Jr., G. L. Mattingly, and J. M. Miller (eds.), Benchmarks in Time and Culture: An Introduction to Palestinian Archae- ology, (Atlanta, 1988), 402. 27 N. Glueck, The Other Side of the Jordan (New Haven, 1940), 15; The Other Side of the Jordan, rev. ed. (Cambridge, MA, 1970), 21-22. 28 S. Cohen, in G.A. Buttrick, (ed.), The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. 3, (Nashville, 1962), 35; A.H. Van Zyl, The Moabites, “Pretoria Oriental Series,” Vol. 3, (Leiden, 1960), 60. 29 B. Oded, “Observations on Methods of Assyrian Rule in Transjordania after the Palestin- ian Campaign of Tiglath-pileser III,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 29 (1970), 181-182; cf. P. Bienkowski, “Beginning of the Iron Age,” 3-4. 30 Dorsey, Roads and Highways, 50. Dorsey also points out that derek hammelek is the only road in the Hebrew Bible that is not named after its destination. G.L. MATTINGLY 95

Tariq es-Sultani, was used for trade and travel throughout Transjordan’s his- tory. That specific legs of this general route have changed throughout history is illustrated by the likelihood that the Iron Age “King’s Highway” included a stretch that ran from Aracir to Baluc.31 But it was not until the 2nd century CE that Trajan “converted The backbone of Jordan’s modern road system is the Desert Highway, which runs from Amman to Aqaba.32 Along with the route followed by the modern King’s Highway, this line of travel has always been one of the region’s principal north-south thoroughfares. The Desert Highway is, in fact, a more convenient route, since it bypasses the deep of the Mujib and the Hesa. While this eastern road avoided the wadis and made for faster trips, it had less water and posed greater threat from the bedouin.33 It is often sug- gested that this route was the alternative chosen by the Hebrews who were denied passage over the more western route; presumably the Desert Highway would correspond to “the way of the wilderness of Moab” (Deut. 2:8, but not according to the RSV).34 This route has served as the route of the Hajj pilgrims and, still later, the Hejaz railway. In his discussion of the site named Mahattet el-Hajj (“station of the Hajj”), which is located near the south rim of Wadi Mujib, on the King’s Highway, George Adam Smith denied that this name had anything to do with pilgrims en route to Mecca. He insisted that the Desert Highway, further to the east, was so much easier to travel that it must have carried the Hajj traffic; Smith pointed out that this “station” was related to Trajan’s road and was a descriptive term, not a formal place-name [much the same argument used in the preceding discussion of the “King’s Highway”].35 In this discussion of Transjordan’s two north-south routes, we must at least mention the shorter roadways and trails which connected the major par- allel lines of travel–and connected Moab with the Ghor and Palestine. A

31 J.M. Miller, “The Israelite Journey Through (Around) Moab and Moabite Toponymy,” Journal of Biblical Literature, 108/4 (1989), 590-594; G. Horsfield, and R.P.H. Vincent, “Une Stèle Égypto-Moabite au Balouca,” Revue Biblique, 41 (1932), 422; G.A. Smith, Atlas of the Historical Geography of the , (London, 1915), 29-30. 32 H.C. Metz, Jordan: A Country Study, 4th ed., (Washington, D. C., 1991), 154. 33 M. Piccirillo, “Grundriß der biblischen Geographie,” in M. Kellerman, et al., Welt aus der die Bibel Kommt, (Kevelaer, 1982), 26. Cf. Aharoni, Land of the Bible, 54. Negenman and Van Elderen suggest that the Desert Highway was “used extensively only when there was a strong central government, such as in the Roman era.” See J.H. Negenman and B. Van Elderen, “Geog- raphy of the Biblical Lands,” in A.S. van der Woude (ed.), The World of the Bible, “Bible Hand- book,” Vol. 1,“(Grand Rapids, MI, 1986), 20. 34 Aharoni, Land of the Bible, 55, 58; S.T. Carroll, “King’s Highway,” in D.N. Freedman, et al. (eds.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 4, (New York, 1992), 49. 35 G.A. Smith, “The Roman Road between Kerak and Madeba,” Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement, 1904, 374. Miller supports Smith’s argument with ceramic evidence, since virtually no pottery from Islamic times was found at this site; its sherds are almost all Nabataean, Roman, and Byzantine in date. See J. Maxwell Miller (ed.), Archaeological Survey of the Kerak Plateau, (ASOR Archaeological Reports 1), (Atlanta, 1991), 35-36. 96 KING'S HIGHWAY, DESERT HIGHWAY, CENTRAL JORDAN'S KERAK PLATEAU number of scholars, including pioneering authorities like Thomsen and mod- ern researchers like Graf, have illuminated the extensive Roman network of Transjordan.36 Other studies on the Roman roads of Moab have been done by Alt,37 Bowersock,38 Worschech and Knauf,39 and Parker.40 Egyptian itiner- aries in this region have been discussed by, among others, Redford,41 Kafafi,42 and Krahmalkov.43 Martin Noth observed that we know very little about the routes that connected the Ghor to the Transjordanian plateau, including “the ascent of Luhith” (Isa. 15:5; Jer. 48:5) and “the road to Horonaim” (Isa. 15:5) and “descent of Horonaim” (Jer. 48:5).44 And the existence of an Iron Age route from the Moabite highlands across the Lisan ford to En-gedi is still unproven; such a road would explain the geographi- cal references of II Chronicles 20.45 All of these topics need further field research and a systematic treatment.

FAJJ AL-{USAYKIR AND THE LOCATION AND FUNCTION OF AL-MUDAYBI{

One of the most important roadways that connects the two major north- south routes of Transjordan (i.e., the King’s Highway and the Desert High- way) is also, in the words of Koucky, “one of the most conspicuous topo- graphic features of Moab.”46 In simple language, the Fajj al-{Usaykir is a long

36 See the bibliography of works on “Roman Roads” in Beitzel et al., 787. 37 A. Alt, “Zum römischen Straßennetz in der Moabitis,” Zeitschrift des deutschen Palästina- Vereins, 60 (1937), 240-244. 38 G.W. Bowersock, Roman Arabia, (Cambridge, MA, 1983), especially 173-181. 39 U. Worschech, and E.A. Knauf, “Alte Straßen in der nordwestlichen Ard el-Kerak. Ein Vorbericht,” Zeitschrift des deutschen Palästina-Vereins, 101 (1985), 128-133 40 S.T. Parker, (ed.), The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan: Interim Report on the Limes Arabicus Project, 1980-1985, 2 vols., “International Series 340,” (Oxford, 1987); the Roman roads of the Kerak plateau are discussed throughout Parker’s edited work, especially in the report on the “Survey of the Limes Zone,” written by F.L. Koucky and contained on pp. 41-106 in vol. 1. Koucky gives secial attention to the caravan routes of the Roman period on pp. 71, 74-75. 41 D. Redford, “Contact between Egypt and Jordan in the New Kingdom: Some Comments on Sources,” in A. Hadidi, (ed.), Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I, (Amman, 1982), 115-119; “A Bronze Age Itinerary in Transjordan,” Journal for the Study of Egyptian Archaeology, 12 (1982), 55-74. 42 Z.A. Kafafi, “Egyptian Topographical Lists of the Late Bronze Age on Jordan (East Bank),” Biblische Notizen, 29 (1985), 17-21. 43 C.R. Krahmalkov, “Exodus Itinerary Confirmed by Egyptian Evidence,” Biblical Archae- ology Review, 20/5 (September/October 1994), 54-62. 44 M. Noth, The Old Testament World, trans. Victor I. Gruhn, (Philadelphia, 1966), 90. Cf. Aharoni, Land of the Bible, 62. See also S. Mittmann, “The Ascent of Luhith,” in A. Ha- didi,(ed.), Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I, (Amman, 1982), 175-180; Beitzel et al., “Roads and Highways,” 785. 45 Dorsey, Roads and Highways, 148. The existence of a shallow Lisan ford during Roman times is probable. 46 F.L. Koucky, “The Regional Environment,” in S.T. Parker, (ed.), The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan: Interim Report on the Limes Arabicus Project, 1980-1985, (“BAR International Series 340,” Vol. 1, Oxford, 1987), 30. G.L. MATTINGLY 97 and wide valley that runs in a northwest-southeast direction from the vicinity of Kerak across the border into Saudi Arabia. In more technical terms, Fajj al- {Usaykir is part of the “Kerak-Wadi el Fiha fault zone, which can be traced for more than 300 km. from Kerak far into Saudi Arabia….”47 Powell refers to this graben and horst formation as “Karak Graben,” which is the north-west- ern extension of the major “Karak-Al Fiha Fault Zone.”48 In his preliminary study of the Roman Limes in the Kerak territory, S. Thomas Parker suggested that this graben, the Fajj, served as a “natural migration route,” the same term that he applied to the Wadi Sirhan.49 Because the plateau has been dissected by numerous wadis, this trough is one of the few easy routes of access into the fertile lands around Kerak.50 Both rims of this natural corridor are lined with archaeological sites, including watchtowers and forts, like el-Mahri.51 The large site of el-Mreigha52 is situated just outside the northern end (on the east) of this broad valley, south of the Kerak Qatrana Road; the north gate of this fortified town faces the Qatrana road. At the other end of the Fajj (on the west) are two prominent sites; far to the south is Mhai – “a modern village on an ancient city ruin”53 – and the unoccupied fortress of Mudaybic, to which we turn our attention in the balance of this paper. The impressive site of al-Mudaybi{ occupies an exceptional strategic posi- tion in the southeastern corner of the Kerak plateau, right at the point where tracks come over a low point, a notch, in the western rim of Fajj al-{Usaykir and pass below the southern end of Jebel al-Batra}.54 While this region appears inhospitable, at least in the hot, dusty summer months, the advantages of this low pass were recognized in ancient times, from the Early Bronze through the Late Islamic periods.55 With regard to its position in the Iron Age defensive network of Moab, Glueck suggested that “Mdeibi’ and el-Mahri were particu- larly important as key posts which guarded the access to the rich Moabite plateau from the tracks which led through the broad Fejj el-’Aseikir to the

47 F. Bender, Geology of Jordan, (Berlin/Stuttgart, 1974), 114. 48 J. Powell, The Geology of the Karak Area: Map Sheet No. 3152 III, (Amman, 1988), 1, 103- 105. 49 S.T. Parker, Romans and Saracens: A History of the Arabian Frontier, (American Schools of Oriental Research Dissertation Series 6, Winona Lake, IN, 1986), 15, 79. On the commercial and political role of Wadi Sirhan, see N. Glueck, “Wadi Sirhan in North Arabia,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 96 (1944), 7-17; Bowersock, Roman Arabia, 154-159. 50 Koucky, “Regional Environment,” 40. 51 Miller, Archaeological Survey, 138. 52 Miller, Archaeological Survey, 123-124. 53 Miller, Archaeological Survey, 163-164, 166. 54 Everyone who writes about this site (e.g., Musil, Glueck, Miller) is impressed by its posi- tion and its defenses. 55 Miller, Archaeological Survey, p. 163, reports sherds from Mudaybic that range in date from the Early Bronze Age through Modern period, but most of the diagnostic sherds come from the Iron Age and the Nabataean, Roman, Byzantine, Ayyubid/Mamluk, and Late Islamic periods. 56 N. Glueck, Explorations in Eastern Palestine III, “Annual of the American Schools of Ori- 98 KING'S HIGHWAY, DESERT HIGHWAY, CENTRAL JORDAN'S KERAK PLATEAU northeast and east below these fortresses.”56 For Glueck the role of Mudaybic in Nabataean times was just as obvious–it was “one of the important outposts guarding the trade route which led from to Nakhl [another major site in this part of Moab], to el-Moreighah, and northward to Damascus.”57 Since Mudaybic is located on the route that allowed travelers to enter or leave the fertile plateau country, by linking the King’s Highway with the Desert Highway, perhaps we should think in terms of the site’s commercial role. Its position was enhanced by the fact that the Fajj offered travelers an east-west route just north of the rugged Wadi el-Hesa. Northbound travelers and caravans on the Desert Highway could cross over to the interior route just after they had circumnavigated the upper tributaries of the Hesa; southbound traffic on the King’s Highway avoided the Wadi el-Hesa by swinging out to the flat desert route. The recovery of exotic products from al-Mudaybi{ would, of course, contribute immensely to our understanding of trade con- nections. During the Iron Age, a tremendous amount of effort was made to fortify a bare knoll that was protected on three sides by wadis; limestone was quarried from nearby outcrops, and basalt slabs were carried in from the volcanic dike in the wadi on the site’s north side. This well built but compact fortress, which measures ca. 65 m north-south X 90 m east-west, has been occupied, repaired, and remodeled until modern times, when some of its internal walls were rearranged for sheepfolds. The original date of construction is almost certainly Iron Age II. Water was obtained from cisterns within and outside the main walls and in the floor of the Fajj; a modern reservoir in the wadi on the north side of Mudaybic has replaced an ancient dam, remnants of which were reported by Glueck.58 The fortress is entered through two gates, a large one on the east – facing the Fajj al-{Usaykir – and a smaller in the western wall – opening into the rich tableland that stretches to the edge of the Graben. A series of proto- aeolic capitals have been found just inside the east gate.59 This style of archi- tecture is well known from six ancient Israelite sites, where the decorative cap- ental Research” 18-19, (New Haven, 1939), 70. The whole question of Moabite border fortresses is still uncertain. Though he did not have the means to date the sites he visited, Musil was also aware of the strategic significance of Mudaybic. See A. Musil, Arabia Petraea, Vol. 1, (Vienna, 1907), 81-82. 57 N. Glueck, Explorations in Eastern Palestine I, “Annual of the American Schools of Ori- ental Research,” Vol. 14, (Philadelphia, 1934), 69. 58 Glueck, Explorations I, 69. Koucky, “Regional Environment,” p. 30, reports that the Fajj is a grass-covered, muddy plain in the winter and spring. 59 I. Negueruela, “The Proto-Aeolic Capitals from Mudeibi’a, in Moab,” Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 26 (1982), 395-401, 569-572. In addition to the four capi- tals reported from Mudaybic, and two more examples are known in Jordan, one from Kerak and one from Amman. 60 A. Kempinski, and R. Reich, (eds.), The Architecture of Ancient Israel from the Prehistoric G.L. MATTINGLY 99 itals are always found “near administrative buildings and palaces.”60 The pres- ence of this monumental architecture near the desert fringe of Moab raises questions concerning the exact function and long-term significance of al- Mudaybi{.

THE KERAK RESOURCES PROJECT AND AL-MUDAYBI{

Jordan’s rapid demographic and economic changes threaten the survival of numerous archaeological sites, including the important site of Mudaybi{. Because this fortified position needs to be examined more carefully and pre- served for the future, the Kerak Resources Project (KRP) plans to continue its long-term study of resource utilization by conducting a small-scale, problem- solving excavation here and by coordinating other research that will place this interesting site in its historical, architectural, economic, and environmental contexts. Under the auspices of the Hashemite Kingdom’s Department of Antiquities and in affiliation with the American Schools of Oriental Research, KRP’s pilot season was completed during the summer of 1995. The purpose of KRP is to document ways in which occupants of the Kerak district exploited available natural resources, including site location and access to local and long-distance trade goods.61 During this first season of fieldwork, 19 carefully selected sites – out of 435 sites located by the Miller-Pinkerton Survey of the Kerak Plateau – were examined in detail. In the summer of 1997, KRP will expand its activity and work on three fronts by: (1) launching the excavation of Mudaybic with the purpose of identifying the site’s history and function, vis-à-vis its location near Moab’s desert fringe and its strategic position on the Fajj; (2) coordinating regional research by specialists in agronomy, botany, cultural anthropology, geology, geomorphology, historic preservation, and soil science; and (3) continuing to document and photograph features on and around the 443 sites originally examined by the Archaeological Survey of the Kerak Plateau.

to the Persian Periods, (Jerusalem, 1992), 212. Cf. Y. Shiloh, The Proto-Aeolic Capital and Israelite Ashlar Masonry, (Jerusalem, 1979). 61 The initial reports on KRP’s first season have been written by Gerald L. Mattingly; at the time of writing they are “The 1995 Field Season: Kerak Resources Project,” ACOR Newsletter, 7/2 (Winter 1995), 4; “The Race against Progress in Central Jordan,” Biblical Archaeologist, 59/1 (1996), 69; “Kerak Resources Project 1995: A Preliminary Report on the Pilot Season,” forthcoming in the Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan (1996); “A New Agenda for Research on Ancient Moab,” Biblical Archaeologist, 60 (1997), 214-221.