(no subject)

[theyellowhobbit]

 I went on a shopping expedition with R. and M. we went to H&M and the Gap outlet and I bought shiny things.

Speaking of shiny...

Introduction: An Overview of Miqva’ot in Ancient Israel.

Ritual baths, or miqva’ot in Hebrew, are a very common phenomenon found in the archaeological record of ancient Israel. They are found throughout Israel, including at Masada, Herodium, Jericho, Jerusalem, Qumran, Gezer, and Sepphoris (Reich, 1996). I would like to look at two sites in particular: The Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem and Qumran.

In this paper I will present you with a background on miqva’ot and their place in Jewish law and practice, as well as an overview of relevant scholarship on the topic. Then I will talk about the elaborate process involved in building a miqvah, and the significance of this. Next I will present the two sites, Jerusalem and Qumran, and the artifacts linked to the miqva’ot. I will then compare the two miqva’ot and the assemblages associated with them. Finally, I will conclude with the significance of my findings, the greater cultural importance of miqva’ot, and what remains unknown to this day.

 

Background: What is a Miqvah Anyways?

            A miqvah, in the simplest sense of the word, is a gathering of water. The term is first used in the Tanach in Genesis chapter 1, verse 10. “וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים לַיַּבָּשָׁה אֶרֶץ, וּלְמִקְוֵה הַמַּיִם קָרָא יַמִּים; וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים, כִּי-טוֹב. And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters called He Seas; and God saw that it was good.[1]” According to Jewish law, the act of immersion in a miqvah is required to obtain a state of purity.[2]^,[3]

Jewish tradition places great importance on ritual purity. A person or an object can be either tameh, impure or tahor, pure. Impurity usually comes from some sort of contact with bodily fluids, disease, or dead bodies. Impurity is not seen as bad, necessarily, but a state of purity is required for many Jewish practices that involve sanctifying oneself, or coming into contact with something holy[4]. For example, in order to enter the Beit Hamikdash, one must be in a state of purity.[5] Another example, which is relevant, is niddah. A woman becomes a niddah during her period of menstrual impurity, and stays that way for seven days afterwards. In order for her to become pure again, she must immerse in a miqvah. Since Judaism views relations between husband and wife as holy, according to traditional Jewish law, a married couple cannot touch each other while the wife is in this state of niddah. Thus, miqva’ot were (and still are) essential even in everyday Jewish life.

Only starting in the rabbinic texts does the term miqvah denote an artificial pool built for the purpose of obtaining ritual purity (Galor, 2003, p. 291-2). Originally it referred to natural sources of water, such as streams, rivers, lakes, seas, or collected rainwater. All of these bodies of water are considered pure, and will purify one who immerses himself, and stays pure after contact with an impure person or animal.

Miqva’ot were used for things other than ritual purity. For example, in medieval times, they doubled as regular baths, since there was an order forbidding the Jews from washing in the river with Christians. Only in modern times does the word miqvah denote a ritual bath that is only used for the purposes of obtaining purity. (Galor, 2003, p. 292)

 

Former Scholarship on Miqva’ot and Qumran:

            The miqva’ot of the Old City of Jerusalem were excavated by Professor Nahman Avigad from 1969 to 1982 (Geva, 2003, p. 1). Some of Avigad’s work was published during his lifetime, and posthumously Hillel Geva and Ronny Reich have published more material from these excavations. Ehud Netzer has written extensively on building projects that took place at the end of the Second Temple period (ending in 70 CE) (Netzer, 1977). David Small has written about Hellenistic baths in Palestine (Small, 1987).

            Many scholars have studied Qumran, which was originally excavated by Roland de Vaux. Not everyone agrees that it was an Essene site.

Professor H. Stegman described Qumran as a publishing house where manuscripts were produced. A. Lemaire favored the possibility of a school, a center of Essene scholarship. E.M. Cook installed a great ritual bath there, given the quantity of water reserves…Norman Golb sees a small fortress fiercely defended by the Zealots…P. Donceel Voute sees a villa rustica of people of status with a factory making perfumed ointments... She sees a triclinium, the dining hall for the upper classes...S. Shapiro finds a papyrus factory…Finally, Qumran could be a commercial center. (Humbert & Grenache, 2000, p. 140)

 

But there are many scholars who see the giant pools as ritual baths, including Bryant Wood and Katharina Galor.

            To this day, there has been no extensive comparative analysis of ritual baths in Israel. Many miqva’ot have been excavated, but they have generally been interpreted through the lens of interpreting the site at which they were found. But very few scholars have studied them directly. Studying miqva’ot would help us to understand the ritual practices of early Judaism better than we could by just making assumptions about the past based on texts and traditions.

            An exception to this is Ronny Reich, who for his doctoral dissertation wrote on "Miqwa'ot (Jewish Ritual Baths) in Eretz-Israel, in the Second Temple, Mishnah and Talmud Periods", under the supervision of Professor N. Avigad and Professor I.L. Levine. He also wrote articles on miqva’ot in Qumran, the City of David, and the Temple Mount. He has also written extensively on stone vessels, many of which have been found in miqva’ot (Reich, 1999).

Following on the path of Reich, I bring to you a more focused study of miqva’ot in ancient Israel.

 

Argument: Were Miqva’ot Really That Important?

            Because of the centrality of purity in Judaism during the Second Temple, and because of the influence of Greek and Roman thought into the region, Jewish architects put a lot of time, funding, and effort into the construction of miqva’ot.

            The building of miqva’ot was no cultural accident. The laws surrounding the construction of miqva’ot are very complicated. A miqvah cannot be filled with “drawn water,” but rather must be filled by water from natural sources, either rainwater that collected by gravity or spring water led into the miqvah by aqueducts. (These requirements were somewhat eased by the fact that it was possible to mix pure and impure water, provided there was a minimum volume of forty se’ah of pure water.)

            Water in the Middle East, including Israel, has always been a precious commodity. The region gets very little rainfall, especially in the Negev and Arava deserts in the southern part of the country. Many times in the Torah punishment and reward from God were depicted as either the rain falling or not falling at its proper time.[6] Water was needed for agriculture, for livestock, and for human consumption. But yet massive amounts of it were used for ritual bathing- the total volume of the baths at Qumran is 1,127,500 liters (Wood, 1984, 57)!

            I argue that this was all necessary for the practice of Judaism in that time period. While the Temple still existed, people were constantly going in to offer up sacrifices. As such, they needed a pure status whenever they entered. Cohanim and Levi’im worked in the Temple every day, and needed to keep a constant state of purity. And it was so easy to become impure. If one came within a certain distance of an impure person, they, too would become impure. In some cases, even the transfer of an object, or sitting on something an impure person sat on, would transfer the state of impurity.[7]

            As a result, miqva’ot were in constant use. They were a worthwhile investment for a city, neighborhood, or a personally wealthy household to have. The easier access one had to purification, the easier time they would have with keeping all of the intricate laws of Judaism. Thus, a private miqvah was a marker of personal status, and a nicer miqvah would convey a higher socio-economic position.

            In addition, engineers were employed to work with accuracy, because the tiniest flaw in the architecture could possibly invalidate a whole miqvah, making it useless. Miqva’ot needed to be constantly maintained and supervised. For all of these reasons, the Jews put far more effort and resources into building miqva’ot than they did with constructing houses or other buildings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Evidence: An In-depth Look at Two Miqva’ot, and the Artifacts Found Therein.

Jerusalem:

The miqvah:

            In area A, stratum 6 square H11, a miqvah was found, miqvah L.65. It is built of ashlars, that is to say, cut stones.[8] This is clearly different from the masonry of other walls found in stratum 6, which are built of normal fieldstones that were uncut. The blocks of the miqvah walls were 35-40 centimeters wide, 65-70 centimeters long, and they were made of relatively soft nari limestone. A wide foundation trench was dug into the ground, into which the miqvah was inserted, rather than them just building on top of the ground. The miqvah is 2.15 meters wide. The length could not be determined because the miqvah was destroyed on the north by a foundation trench from the medieval period. A stretch of the western wall was found, that measures 3.8 meters. The bottom basin is intact, and its measurements are 2.15 by 1.55 meters. (Reich, 2000, p. 88)

There was once a staircase leading in, though now only the lowest step remains. On the north side of the miqvah, there is a wide step with a tread of 50 centimeters. To the north of the step there was a fill of loose rubble, which was interpreted as either part of the fill below the staircase, or it was a pit that was created by people who robbed the ashlars for secondary use in other structures. Reich assumes that the tread of the reconstructed step was narrower than the lowest step (30-35 centimeters) and thus, the staircase would have had seven to eight steps. The rise of the lowest step would have been 25 centimeters, and the original depth of this miqvah would have been at least two meters. This miqvah was located within the basement of a building. It also quite possibly had a roof, as ashlars, similar to those in the walls, were found fallen on the floor of the installation.[9] (Reich, 2000, p. 88-89)

 

The artifacts:

            Three artifacts have been recorded as being found in miqvah L.65. Artifact number 2270- is classified as a stone artifact, specifically a casting mould[10] (Reich, 2003, pl. 8:6:5). It is a “fragment of rectangular limestone block 5.5x15.5x13.5 centimeters, with groove marks made to cast bronze Implement, dark traces in groove” (Reich, 2003, 288). Artifact number 2367 is a wood object, with no picture or further description published (Gutfeld, 2003, p. 557). Artifact number 2468 is also stone artifact[11] (Reich, 2003, pl. 8:6:7). It is a small basin, which is made of limestone, it is rectangular shaped, has dimensions of 9x12x15.8 centimeters, and it is very rough and crudely carved.

           There was also pottery[12] found in the western part of the installation, underneath the collapse of ashlars (Reich, 2000, p. 89). Many of these bowls are complete, and many more could be reconstructed from pieces found (Reich, 2000, p. 89). Most of these were small bowls or plates[13] (Reich, 2000, p. 89).

 

 

 

Qumran:

On the miqva’ot:

            Twenty-six water-holding installations were found at Qumran[14] (Galor, 2003, p. 293). There was an intricate water system that supplied all of the different miqva’ot with water. An aqueduct connected to the different pools in the complex. Loci 56 and 58 are two connected parts of a stepped pool with a wall constructed later in between them. They have a capacity of 30 and 85 cubic meters respectively[15] (Galor, 2003, p. 293). They are plastered[16], and possibly were re-plastered after an earthquake (Humbert & Chambon, 2003, p. 32-33). The steps of L.56 (as well as many other pools in Qumran) take up the entire width of the pool (Wood, 1984, p. 47).

 

The artifacts:

In Locus 56, a bronze fibula, a bowl, a jar lid, and three jars were found. Additionally, five coins were found, dating from 132 BCE to 43 CE. In Locus 58 there was a bronze rod, a clay silo cover, a goblet, a jug, a small cooking pot, two larger cooking pots, and a juglet. In the Northwest corner there were four bowls, nine jugs (one spouted, number 1223), one juglet, one small jug, two goblets, a flask, a Herodian lamp, a jar, seven cooking pots, and a cooking pot base. In the eastern part of the pool, there were four jugs, two cooking pots, two plates, and three bowls[17] (Humbert & Chambon, 2003, 32-33).

 

 

 

Analysis: What did the Construction Involve?

Both L.65 of Jerusalem and L.56/58 of Qumran have a collection of artifacts found therein. Both contain pottery, including plates and small bowls, which probably were used for eating. The collection of Qumran is far more impressive than that of Jerusalem, containing coins, jugs, jars, and even a Herodian lamp.

It is significant to note the use of ashlar masonry in the construction of the Jerusalem miqva’ot. These miqva’ot were installations akin to a modern swimming pool. Contemporary architecture was usually made from cutting a structure out of limestone. In addition, there was possibly a roof on top of miqvah L.65. The fallen ashlars seem to point in that direction. From the shape of the ashlars, Reich proposes that the roof was a barrel vault (Reich, 2000, p. 88). A barrel-vault is a rounded ceiling, of Roman design. It is much more difficult to construct than a pointed ceiling.

In the Qumran miqva’ot on the other hand, it is notable that the design of having the steps take up the entire pool is very inefficient. In order to get the desired volume, the other dimensions must be increased (Wood, 1984, p. 47). De Vaux believed that steps were necessary in order for people to have access to the lower levels of water, and Driver thought that they were needed for the purposes of cleaning and maintenance. However, if this were the case, one would find steps in cistern 110, which is the deepest of the cisterns. (Wood, 1984, p. 47) But we do not find steps there. Additionally, if the purpose of the steps was for obtaining water at lower levels or cleaning, there would be no reason for the steps to take up the entire width of the pools.

            The Qumran architects put a lot of time and effort into their plans, and did not arbitrarily decide to have steps that extended (Wood, 1984, p. 46) Rather, they were a necessary part of the design. Wide steps allowed large numbers of people to access the pools.

            Had the miqva’ot not been so central in Jewish practice, the architects in Jerusalem would not have gone out of their way to specially carve stones to line and roof the installation. Qumran engineers would not have built twenty six different pools, they would not have created such wide steps, and they would not have lined them with plaster. All of these construction practices point to a higher ritual purpose.

 

Discussion and Conclusion: Purity and Society

            Miqva’ot are an essential clue to understanding Hellenistic and Roman Jewish society. The fact that they were so prevalent shows just how important purity was during that time period. Ritual purity is something that is not a part of modern thought, and is beyond the comprehension of the average westernized person. Scientifically, nothing will happen to a man who sleeps on the same bed as a menstruating woman, nor will a person contract disease merely by being in the same room as a person who died. Although once “unclean” animals such as pigs and shellfish carried diseases, modern technology allows people to eat these foods without any physiological harm coming to them. The laws seem rather arbitrary, and rabbis have tried for thousands of years to ascribe reasons to them. But even the Talmud admits, nothing would be pure or impure, except for the fact that God declared it to be so.[18]

            It is a leap of faith to subscribe to all of these laws, but the fact that these miqva’ot were so prominent, that they took so much time, resources, and knowledge to build, and that they used so much precious water shows just how seriously the Jews took them. The elite would spend great wealth to have their own miqvah. The poor would gather their resources together in order to have one. Without a miqvah it was utterly impossible to participate in the mainstream religion, which was an all-consuming part of life in Israel.

            The question that remains unasked is: if miqva’ot were that important in Jewish practice, and if the laws of ritual purity did exist as far back as during the First Temple, why do we not see miqva’ot that date earlier than Hellenistic times? Only further study of miqva’ot can illuminate the extent to which Greek and Roman culture influenced the building of these artificial installations, whether it had to do with an increase of wealth in the region, whether the practice of the religion became more widespread or more strictly enforced, or whether the rules really did not exist until a later time than assumed by the maximalist scholars. As of now, the evidence is still inconclusive. What I have shown you certainly points to a greater centrality of the law in Jewish society. But until we can thoroughly examine all the miqva’ot of ancient Israel and compare them all and the contexts in which they were found, our hypotheses will remain speculation.

Illustrations:

Figure 1: Bottom of miqveh L.65, after the fallen ashlars and pottery were removed (Reich, 2000, p.88)

Figure 2: Pottery bowls, trapped under ashlar collapse in western part of miqveh L.65 (Reich, 2000, p. 89)

 

Figure 3: the ashlar collapse (Reich, 2003, p. 89)

Figure 4: A water small installation in the center, and on the left is miqvah L.65 (Reich, 2002, p.90)

Figure 5: A stone mold found in miqvah L.65 (Reich, 2003, pl. 8:6:5).

 

Figure 6: A stone vessel found in miqvah L.65 (Reich, 2003, pl. 8:6:7).

Figure 7: A map of the plastered pools at Qumran, according to de Vaux (Galor, 2003, p.293)

Figure 8: A close-up of one of the (unspecified) plastered pools at Qumran

From: http://www.trekker.co.il/english/israel/i-kumeran-02.htm
Works Cited

 

Galor, K. (2003). Plastered Pools: A New Perspective. In Humbert, J.B. & Chambon, A. (Ed.). The excavations of Khirbet Qumran and Ain Feshkha: Synthesis of Roland de Vaux's field notes: IA (English Edition ed.). (pp. 291-319). Fribourg, Switzerland: University Press Göttingen Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Geva, H. (2000). General Introduction to the Excavations in the Jewish Quarter. In H. Geva (Ed.), Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem (pp. 1-30). 2 vols. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Gutfeld, Oren. (2003). Concordance of Finds in Areas A,W and X-2. In H. Geva (Ed.), Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem (pp. 553-568). 2 vols. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Humbert, J.B. & Chambon, A. (Ed.). (2003). The excavations of Khirbet Qumran and Ain Feshkha: Synthesis of Roland de Vaux's field notes: IB (English Edition ed.). Fribourg, Switzerland: University Press Göttingen Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Humbert, J.B., & Grenache, C. (2000). Interpreting the Qumran Site. [Electronic version]. Near Eastern Archaeology, 63, 3, 140-143.

Netzer, E. (1977). The Winter Palaces of the Judean Kings at Jericho at the End of the Second Temple Period. [Electronic version]. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 228, 1-13.

Reich, R. (1996). Ritual Baths. In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East (Vol. 4, pp. 430-431). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Reich, R. (1999) University of Haifa Faculty: Ronny Reich: Publications. http://research.haifa.ac.il/~archlgy/staff/pub_reich.html

Reich, R. (2000). Hellenistic to Medieval Strata 6-1. In H. Geva (Ed.), Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem (pp. 83-110). 2 vols. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Reich, R. (2003). Stone Vessels, Weights, and Architectural Fragments. In H. Geva (Ed.), Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem (pp. 256-262). 2 vols. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Small, D.B. (1987). Late Hellenistic Baths in Palestine. [Electronic version]. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 266, 59-74.

Wood, B.G. (1984). To Dip or Sprinkle? The Qumran Cisterns in Perspective. [Electronic version]. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 256, 45-60.

---

[1] Text and translation from http://www.mechon-mamre.org/

[2] See Leviticus chs. 14 -16.

[3] In some cases, more is required than just immersion. To remove impurity that comes from contact with a dead body, or from tzara’at (a skin disease commonly and inaccurately translated as leprosy), rites involving the slaughter of red heifers, or killing one bird and dipping another in blood, are required. These rites are no longer performed, as the red heifer is currently extinct, no cases of tza’arat have been documented in recent history, and there is no Temple in which the Cohanim, the priests, can perform these rites. See Leviticus ch.14 and Numbers ch.19.

[4] Holy coming from the word קדש, which also means separate. Judaism sanctifies things by setting them aside from everything else.

[5] This comes up all over Tanach, for example in Numbers 19:13.

[6]See Deuteronomy 11:13-21, for example. This is the second paragraph of the Shema, a prayer that Jews say twice a day in order to affirm their belief in God. In addition, from Sukkot, the Festival of Booths, until Passover, the line “moshiv ha ruach u’morid ha gashem” (“You who cause the wind to blow and the rain to descend”) is inserted in the shmoneh esrei, a group of 19 blessings which comprise the central part of the prayer service which is said three times a day (four on the Sabbath).

[7] See, for example, Leviticus 15:19-24.

[8] Figures 1-4

[9] Fig. 3

[10] Fig. 5

[11] Fig. 6

[12] Fig. 2

[13] Unfortunately, these were not published beyond the brief mention they got in Reich’s original report of the excavation of miqvah L.65. Hopefully further research can illuminate the nature of these pots, specifically the make, coloration, patterns, and the composition of the clay.

[14] Fig. 7

[15] Roland de Vaux did not include dimensions of the miqva’ot in his field notes, nor did Katharina Galor in her article. The author hopes to obtain accurate measurements of miqvah 56/58 in her future expedition.

[16] Fig.8 shows one of the plastered pools of Qumran

[17] Pictures and further descriptions of these items remain unpublished.

[18] I’m unclear exactly where in the Talmud this quote is from, but I remember learning it at the beginning of my Spirit and Law class with Professor Talya Fishman last semester, and I will try to get the actual quote when I can.

I finished it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Someday it will be a thesis, with even more pages.