Agriculture and Religion at Bab Edh-Dhra‘ and Numeira during the Early Bronze Age Davip McCreery Introduction The admittedly overly ambitious goal in this brief article is to demonstrate the potential value of environmental and paleoethnobotanical studies as tools that can assist in clarifying the character of religious practices in specific regions of preliterate ancient Palestine. It is a privilege to have this opportunity to offer a modest contribution in honor of Walt Rast and Tom Schaub, two scholars and friends who were instrumental in launching my—and many others’'—archaeological field-work and teaching careers. ‘Anyone interested in the ancient history of Palestine realizes how important the sites of Bab edh- Dhra‘ and Numeira are for understanding the Early Bronze Age. The surveys and excavations at Bab edh-Dhri‘ in 1965 and 1967 by Lapp (1965, 1968, 1975: 104-10; Schaub and Rast 1989) and Rast and. Schaub in 1975, 1977, 1979, and 1981 (Rast and Schaub 1978, 1980, 1981), as well as the excava- tions at Numeira by Rast and Schaub in 1977, 1979, and 1981 (Rast and Schaub 1981) and Coogan in 1983 (Coogan 1984) have documented the occupational history of these Early Bronze Age sites, along with identifying a number of distinetive aspects of both sites. The recent publication by Rast and Schaub (2003) provides the most detailed overview to date of the stratigraphy, occupational sequence, architecture, and ceramic traditions of the Bab edh-Dhrat town site, along with a number of specialists’ reports Despite these extensive and admirable publications, little has been written about the religious traditions of Bab edh-Dhra. The reason for this is quite understandable, since we do not have contem- porary written records describing the religious beliefs and practices of this particular region. Funerary practices, public structures such as altars and temples, as well as cultic objects provide the primary data upon which most reconstructions of ancient religious practices are based. Later Bronze and Iron Age Canaanite texts (for example, the tablets from Ras es-Shamra) and in some cases, biblical traditions, also provide insights into the nature of earlier preliterate religious traditions in Palestine. I hope to demonstrate that consideration of paleobotanical assemblages can also provide important clues regard- ing ancient religious practices T. One might well question che validity of using biblical sraditions ro reconstruct Bronze Age Canaanite religion in Pal- cstine. Although caution is cerainly warranted, itis clear that ancient Israelite religion was deeply influenced by Canaan. ite religious traditions, adopting, among other things, che major Canaanite seligious/harvest festivals. As H. J. Kraus (1965: 16) has noted, “There is no element in the cultic tradition of the Old Testament which is not in some way connected with, the world of Canaanite religion.” It is my assumption, therefore, that many biblical raditions clearly reflect their Canaan: ite origins, despite the fact that they have been reinterpreted and, in most cases, the fertbity/agricultural origins of eultic practices have been “historized” and somewhat obsc78 Davin McCxeery The Occupational History of Bab edh-Dhra‘ and Numeira Frankfort (1978) and Jacobsen (1976) are among the many scholars who have noted the close re- lationship between ancient Near Eastern religion, the natural environment, and social organization, A discussion of the possible religious tradition of Bab edh-Dhra‘ must therefore take into account what is known about the occupational history and social organization of the site. Although there are many unresolved questions, such as: “Who were the original inhabitants of Bab edh-Dira® and from where did they come?” and, “What factors lead to the rise and decline of the EB II-III town site?” and, “How were the EB IV inhabitants of the region related to the preceding EB III residents of the Bab edh-Dhrit town site?” the overall occupational sequence of Bab edh-Dhra€ is relatively clear. Rast and Schaub (2003: 17) have identified five major strata ranging from EB IA (Stratum V) through EB IV (Stratum 1). The earliest evidence of human activity at the site comes from the numer- ous EB IA shaft tombs located south, southwest, and west of the town site. The dearth of permanent structures from this stratum has lead to the conclusion that the EB IA burials are those of mobile pas- toralists rather than sedentary agriculturalists. This conclusion is certainly reasonable, but evidence of an EB LA structure in Area J2 and camping in Area HI (Rast and Schaub 2003: 73), along with Chal- colithie settlements in the surrounding region, raises the possibility of limited sedentary occupation in the immediate vicinity of Bab edh-Dhhra® as early as EB IA if not earlier (see Bentley 1987: 11-21 and Schaub and Rast 1989: 552-54). There is extensive evidence for permanent, year-round occupation at Bab edh-Dhra‘ in EB IB (Stratum 1V), including shaft tombs, charnel houses, and mud-brick houses. The Stratum LV village was unfortified and quite large. Remains of mud-brick structures and occupational debris from this phase have been found within the confines of the later EB II-III walled town as well as areas west and southwest of the EB II-III town. Extensive burning of Stratum IV buildings and one charnel house (GI) suggests that the sprawling village may have heen attacked and destroyed at the end of EB IB (Rast and Schaub 2003: 102-30) The EB II (Stratum III) town appears to have been established shortly after the destruction of the Stratum IV village, possibly by the survivors of the EB IB settlement (Rast and Schaub 2003: 130, 156). A number of new developments occurred during this phase. Whereas circular charnel houses like those introduced in EB IB continued to be used in early EB II, they were soon replaced by larger, rectangular charnel houses. Most domestic structures continued to be made of mud brick. Although the evidence is fragmentary, it seems likely that the Stratum III village was protected by a substantial mud-brick wall, sections of which were incorporated into the later Stratum II stone fortifications. A stone structure located on a high point at the southwest comer of the village appears to have been a sanctuary and constitutes the earliest evidence for a specialized religious structure (Rast and Schaub 2003: 156-218). The transition from the Stratum III village to the Stratum II town appear to have been relatively seamless but was accompanied by a dramatic increase in construction activity, Whereas domestic struc- tures continued to be built, for the most part using unfired mud brick, a number of large public works projects were initiated utilizing stone foundations with mud-brick superstructures. Although there is no evidence of destruction at the end of Stratum II, the construction of a massive stone fortification wall (averaging 7 m in width), indicates increased security concerns. The construction of a city gate along the west wall (Field XIII), which was blocked near the end of EB III, also attests to concerns about security, as does the construction of a gate or fortress at the northeastern end of the site (Field XI) in late EBII / early EB III. The earlier sanctuary at the southwest corner of the site (Field XII) was rebuilt at this time and a new structure, possibly cultic, was erected inside the northern fortification walls (Field XVI). Domestic construction intensified, with suburbs springing up to the west, south, andAgriculture and Religion at Bab Edh-Dhra® and Numeiva during the Early Bronze Age 9 cast of the fortified town site (Rast and Schaub 2003: 151-359). In the cemetery, the rectilinear char- nel houses introduced in EB II continued to be used but became larger and were often two stories high. Alll of the above-mentioned factors indicate that the population and prosperity of Bab edh-Dhra reached its zenith during the EB III Period. It is probably not coincidental that, precisely at this time of intensified activity at Bab edh-Dhra‘, Numeira was established some 13 km to the south (Rast and Schaub 2003: 251). It is reasonable to conjecture that Numeira was established as a sister city by the inhabitants of Bab edh-Dhrat in order to expand their agricultural holdings and better secure the re- gion, The numerous EB III burials at Bab edh-Dhra‘, along with the lack of evidence of a cemetery at Numeira, adds further credence to the suggestion that Numeira was established as a satellite settlement and that their deceased were interred at the Bab edh-Dhra cemetery. The demise of the fortified town site of Bab edh-Dhra‘ at the end of the EB III Period (ca. 2350 B.C.) coincided with the end of occupation at Numeira and the widespread collapse of urban’ civiliza- tion throughout Palestine. There is no question that Numeira was destroyed in a sudden conflagration and that the site was never again occupied (apart from a Nabatean structure on the western periphery of the site that dates to some 2,000 years later). “The situation at Bab edh-Dhrat was quite different. Whereas the urban age at Bab edh-Dhra came to an end at the same time that Numeira was destroyed, it is not entirely clear whether the town site at Bab edh-Dhri® was actually destroyed or simply abandoned. What is clear is that after the demise of the urban period, unlike Numeira, Bab edh-Dhra® continued to be occupied for the next three to four hundred years. Most of the evidence of EB IV occupation at Bab edh-Dhrat is found east (Field X) and south (Field IX) of the town site, as well as inside the town along the north wall (Field XVI) The picture that emerges from the EB IV (Stratum 1) evidence is one of reoccupation of the site soon after the demise of the Stratum I] town, Some new structures were erected and others were built on the foundations of Stratum II buildings. The scattered buildings of the EB IV sectlement do not ap- pear to reflect the communal organization that one would expect of a true town oF village. It is unclear whether or not the EB IV inhabitants of Bab edh-Dhrit were newcomers or the descendants of the Stratum II town site. The occupational history of Bab edh-Dhrit can be summarized as consisting of three phases: Proto- Urban EB I, Urban EB II-III, and Post-Urban EB IV. Numeria had a short period of occupation that corresponds to the Stratum II (EB III) occupation of Bab edh-Dhra when Bab edh-Dhra® was at the height of its power and influence. Following the final abandonment of Bab edh-Dhrit at the end of EBIV (ca. 2000 8.c.s.), the region was virtually abandoned for the following 2,000 years.’ Agriculture at Bab edh-Dhra‘ and Numeira The palecbotanical assemblages ar Bab edh-Dhrat and Numeira have been described in derail elsewhere (MeCreery 1980; 2002; 2003) and will be only briefly summarized here. Since there are perceptible diachronic shifts in the assemblages that indicate changes through time, the following discussion will describe the agricultural regimes during the three major phases at Bab edh-Dhra—chat is: the Proto-Urban Period (EB I), the Urban Period (EB II-II1), and the Post-Urban Period (EB IV). 2. The cerm “urban” is problematic, especially when compared to the use ofthis term co refer to contemporary Egyptian, and Mesopotamian “urban sites. Bab edh-Dhhri was never a large “city,” and thus the terms town or village seem more ap- propriate, Nevertheless, when viewed within its own geographical, cultural and historical context, the use of the term urban is appropriate when applied to the EB Il and especially che EB II! settlements at Bab edh-Dhra® and Numeira. 3. Recent discoveries by Steven Faleoner and Philip Edwards at Zahrat adh-Dhra‘ | have documented one case of con. Ba edh- Dea during the Middle Bronze Age (Edwaeds et.al, 2001; 2002), tinued occupation of the Southern Ghor east80 Davin McCxeery Very few botanical remains have been retrieved from EB IA contexts at Bab edh-Dhra, Although this period is well represented by numerous shaft tombs, foodstuffs were not included among the grave goods, As noted above, there is scant evidence of occupation during the EB IA Period, and no botani- cal remains were recovered from primary loci in these areas. Nevertheless, non-primary EB IA loci have produced small quantities of barley, wheat, flax, and fig that suggest at least limited sedentary agriculture in the area during the earliest phases of the cemetery’s use. The evidence from EB IB domestic contexts is much more substantial and represents a well estab- lished, diversified agricultural system, The assemblage is dominated by barley, but wheat was also an important crop. Flax, grape, fig, lentil, bean, and date were also cultivated. Wild mallow and pistachio were also collected as a dietary supplement. Although there is not enough archaeological evidence to justify an “urban” designation for the EB IB occupation, the variety of cereal, garden, and fruit crops being grown would necessitate year-round occupation in order to plant, cultivate, and harvest these various crops at different times of the yeat. The lack of evidence for fortifications in the EB IB suggests an “open settlement,” but the architectural and paleobotanical remains indicate that a permanent vil- lage had been established by this time. ‘A lightly more diversified botanical assemblage emerges in the EB II period, although this might be somewhat misleading, since more EB II samples were recovered than those from EB IB contexts. Barley and wheat continued to be the most commonly represented cultigens, but flax and lentil are also fairly well represented. Grape became much more common, and chickpea and olive make their first appearance, There appeats to be an increase of barley production, compared to wheat. In the EB II Period, barley continued as the primary cereal crop, and wheat production appears to have declined. Fig and flax are well represented and pea, bean, lentil, and olive are present but in fewer numbers. Wild mallow and jujube also appear to have been exploited, At Numeira during this period, the picture is much the same. Barley, whear, flax, pulses, olive, grape, and fig are present in roughly equivalent proportions to those found at Bab edh-Dhhra®, Several large samples of grapes and chickpeas were preserved at Numeira, no doubr due to the final destruction of the site; in light of the fresh grapes, carbonization must have occurred shortly after they were harvested in mid-to-lace summer. “There appears to be a dramatic change in the EB IV agricultural system, but once again caution is warranted, since the number of samples is limited. Evidence from the primary loci indicates that barley production continued, whereas wheat, lax, and pulses declined. Horticulture, on the other hand, ap- pears to have thrived, with fig, olive, and grape constituting 73% of the assemblage A diachronic analysis of the paleobotanical assemblages at Bab edh-Dhea® and Numeita mirrors and supplements the occupational history of these sites, as indicated above, based on the ceramic, strati- graphic, and architectural evidence. The paleobotanical evidence confirms the conclusion that there must have been a permanent settlement with a broad-based agricultural settlement from EB IB-EB III. There are hints of a year-round agriculturally-based settlement as early as EB IA, and the emergence of a complex agricultural industry in EB IB that included irrigation and horticulture further argues for at least a limited sedentary presence in the environs of Bab edh-Dhri during EB 1A, The evidence of broad-spectrum agriculture in the post-urban EB IV period is lacking, but the emphasis on horticulture is striking. The post-urban settlers may not have been ambitious farmers, but they were certainly not nomads. Irrigating and maintaining vineyards and olive orchards as well as fields sown with cereals, legumes, and flax would have required a permanent presence on the site. Religion in Ancient Canaan Although the general outline of Canaanite Religion is well known from the Ras es-Shamra texts, and certain practices can be extrapolated from the biblical traditions, it is difficult to reconstruct howAgriculture and Religion at Bab Edh-Dhra® and Numeiva during the Early Bronze Age 81 local religious practices may have varied from region to region and changed through time, That there were regional differences appears quite evident in the biblical traditions that indicate that different El deities—or different manifestations of El (and Ba‘al)—were worshiped at specific locales. We know, for example, that El Bethel was worshipped at Luz (Gen 31:12; 35:7); El Elyon at Jerusalem (Gen 14:18—20); El Olam at Beer-sheba (Gen 21:33); El Roi in the Negev (Gen 16:13); and El Shaddai in a number of places but primarily identified in the biblical traditions with Abraham at Mamre (see Alt 1968: 10-11; de Vaux 1965: 289-94; Fohrer 1972: 62-65). Likewise, the Ba‘alim of the Canaanite Pantheon were venerated as Ba‘al Berith at Shechem (Judg 8:33); Baal Gad near Banias (Josh 11:17); Baal Hermon near Mr. Hermon (Judg 3:3); and Ba‘al Tamar near Gibeah (Judg 20:33). It is a matter of debate whether these epithets represent distinct deities or, rather, different manifestation of Bl and Ba‘al. In any case, it seems clear that the names and titles of these deities, and pethaps the manner in which they were understood and venerated, varied from place to place. ‘A comparative study of the Ras es-Shamra texts and the biblical traditions suggests that, as time went on, the relative importance or position of various deities within the Canaanite pantheon un- derwent changes. The texts from Ugarit document the rise in power and influence of Ba‘al but still indicate that El remains at the head of the pantheon, along with his consort, Asherah. In the bibli- cal traditions, on the other hand, the Deuteronomistic Historian (DurH), writing near the end of the Iron II period, suggests that Els position has been eclipsed by Baal so that now Ba‘al is presented as the primary male deity, along with his consort Asherah.* All of this suggests that Canaanite Religion was not monolithic or static and that one can detect synchronic as well as diachronic variations in the re- ligious traditions of ancient Palestine in both the Bronze and Iron Ages. This observation is important to keep in mind when attempting to reconstruct what the religious beliefs and practices of a particular place such as Bab edh-Dhri® might have been at any given time. ‘One final observation regarding Canaanite and early Israelite religion is useful, before moving on to consider the specific case of Bab edh-Dhri‘, Few doubt that Canaanite Religion was essenvially a fertility cult whose mythology and cultic celebrations closely mirrored the annual cycle of nature and the agricultural year (see Gaster 1966; Kraus 1965: 36-45; Fohrer 1972: 42-60). In the Baal/Anat eyele of myths, itis clear that Ba‘al’s potency is at its height during the cool, wet winter months from late September through February. When the winter rains trail off in March and stop (for the most part) in April, first the barley and then the wheat crop dies (like Ba‘al himself), allowing the grains to ripen, after which they are harvested. The Ba‘al/Anat mythic cycle describes the death of Ba‘al at the hands (actually the mouth) of his brother Mot (or Death) and after a period of mourning, the actions taken by Ba‘al’s sister and consort Anat, as she exacts revenge by killing Moth in a ritualistic fashion, She seized the Godly Mot - with sword she doth cleave him, with fan she doth winnow him — with fire she doth burn him. With hand-mill she grinds him - In the field she doth sow him. (Pritchard 1969: 140)* 1 Land various Hebrew prophets and editors had no interest in providing an objective analysis or accurate description of the Canaanite pantheon. Quite to the contrary, biblical descriptions of Canaanite religion are distinctively polemical. Nevertheless, che fact that Asherah is consistently characterized as the consort of Bafal, and Anat is not men- tioned, scrongly suggests a shift in the hierarchy of the Canaanite pantheon by late Iron II. The fact that El Shaddai came to be identified with the Hebrew God Yahweh (Exod 6:5) also suggests that some time had passed since El was viewed (at least by the biblical authors) as the head of the Canaanite pantheon 5. See also the translation of this important passage by M.D. Coogan (1978: 112).82 Davin McCxeery Most scholars agree that what is described here is the normal procedure for harvesting and process- ing cereal crops from collecting, threshing, producing flour, and replanting. This would have caken place every year at the time of the barley harvest in late spring and the wheat harvest in early summer.* Understood in a religious context, the people participating in the harvest activities were most likely understood to have been mimicking the actions of Anat killing Mot, or “death,” which would ulti- mately lead to the miraculous resurrection of Ba‘al in the early autumn at the end of the hot, dry sum- ‘mer when the winter rains recommenced and Baal reassumed his throne, ushering in the New Year. The major Canaanite religious festivals, which are clearly reflected in the ancient Israelite cultic calendar, are the barley harvest (the biblical Feast of Unleavened Bread, cf. Exod 23:15; 34:18; and elsewhere), the wheat harvest (the biblical Feast of Weeks, ef. Exod 23:16a; 34:12a; and elsewhere), and the fruit harvest at the end of summer, when grapes, figs, olives, and other fruits were harvested (the biblical Feast of Ingathering, also known as Booths or Tabernacles; cf. Exod 23:16b; Exod 34:22b; and elsewhere), and when the winter rains commenced and the resurrection and reenthronement of Bafal were celebrated. Although the Israelite festivals have been reinterpreted and “historized” as memorials of the Exodus, receiving of the Law at Sinai, and the occupation of the Promised Land, the Canaanite agricultural origins of these three annual harvest festivals are fairly transparent. Ieis important to keep in mind that Ba‘al, in his various manifestations, was primarily a storm-god or rain-god. Given the fact that most of Palestine and western Syria and Phoenicia (j.c., the land of Canaan) does not have major rivers and springs and is thus dependent primarily upon rainfall for its subsistence, it is quite understandable that the primary fertility god would be a storm. or rain-god like Ba‘al. Like most atmospheric gods, Ba‘al was as unpredictable as the weather at any given time, and yet at certain times of the year, his behavior is very predictable; that is, it would rain in the middle of winter (December through February) and seldom rained during the summer months (from mid-June through mid-September). This pattern is accounted for in the life, death, and resurrection sequence of the Ba‘al/Anat cycle of myths. Although this cycle is sometimes associated with the seven-year cycle of famines in Palestine (cf. Coogan 1978: 84), there is good reason to suspect that the eycle of nature and agriculturally duties of planting and harvesting were reenacted annually in the Canaanite cult, regardless of whether or not the region was experiencing a drought. Religion at Bab edh-Dhra‘: Climatological and Paleobotanical Considerations With this background, we finally arrive at the central question of this study, which is, “What, if anything, can we say about religious beliefs and practices at Bab edh-Dhri®?” In raising this question, I am reminded of Leo Oppenheim’ chapter on Mesopotamian religion in his classic work, Ancient Mes- opotamia (Oppenheim 1964: 171-83), where he discusses “Why a ‘Mesopotamian Religion’ Should Not Be Written.” His point is that there is so lirtle evidence and we are so far removed from ancient Mesopotamia both in terms of time and culture that we cannot ever hope to reconstruct an accurate representation of what religion in Mesopotamia was really like. Oppenheim’s conclusions regarding Mesopotamian religion applies equally to the religion of Early Bronze Age Palestine, since we have even less physical evidence and no contemporary textual evidence. Having clearly stated the reasons why an account of Mesopotamian religion cannot and should not be written, Oppenheim proceeded to write a fifty-page chapter on Mesopotamian religion, Having admitted that itis virtually impossible to 6. Ie should be noted that the precise time of harvest would vary, depending upon a region's elevation, annual rainfall, and availability of springs and rivers that could be used for irrigation, a¢ different latitudes and longitudes,Agriculture and Religion at Bab Edh-Dhra® and Numeiva during the Early Bronze Age 83 say anything definitive about the religious traditions of Early Bronze Age Bab edh-Dhrat, I will follow Oppenheim’s lead and proceed to offer a likely scenario for Early Bronze Age religion in the southern Ghos, despite the fragmentary nature of the evidence. In attempting to propose a tentative reconstruction of the prevailing religious beliefs and practices at Bab edh-Dhra¥, my basic assumptions are: 1. The inhabitants of Bab edh-Dhra were Canaanites (whatever that means) 2, Their religious traditions would have been closely bound up with their primary means of subsistence. 3, Their religious beliefs and practices would be reflected, however dimly, in the religious traditions of those in the region (Canaan, Egypt and Mesopotamia) whose ecological setting, social organization, and agricultural regimes most closely reflected their own. Climatological observations of the Southern Ghor over the past one hundred years indicate chat the annual rainfall averages about 50-55 mm annually, or about 2 inches per year. Considering the fact that 250 mm per annum is the minimum required for successful “dry farming” or agriculture based on rainfall alone, one might conclude that the southeastern region of the Dead Sea is a desolate region that is agriculturally unproductive. Although certain biblical passages indicate the former fertility of this region (see Gen 13:10), other passages emphasize the desolate nature of the environment follow- ing the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (see Gen 19:24-25). Western visitors to this region over the past ewo hundred years have emphasized the infertility of the Dead Sea Basin, and most modern visitors to the Southern Ghor, especially during the summer months when temperatures often exceed 100 degrees F./40 degrees C., tend to agree that this isa very inhospitable and marginal environment. Surprisingly, the reality is that the Southern Ghor is one of the most agriculturally productive re- gions in all of Palestine. Despite the lack of rain, there are abundant springs in the area that allow for the irrigation of crops virtually year-round. Because of its low elevation, the Jordan Valley is a virtual greenhouse, with warm sunny weather in the middle of winter, when crops can be grown while the ‘western and eastern highlands are experiencing the harsh freezing weather brought in by winter storms from the north and west. Thus, although the southern Ghor is only 30 km from the highlands, its ecological setting and agricultural regime is radically different from the territories to the east and west. Rather than being directly dependent on annual rainfall for success, the residents of Bab edh-Dhri® would have been dependent on springs for water.’ This being the case, itis likely that the inhabitants of Bab edh-Dhrat would have looked to underground/underworld deities—who were viewed as the source of fresh water springs and rivers—rather than to an atmospheric god like Ba‘al, who as a storm- god was clearly impotent in the southeastern region of the Dead Sea Basin. This view appears to be preserved in modern Arabic traditions in which the agricultural land fed by rainfall in the highlands is referred to as the ard Ba‘l = ‘land of Ba‘al’, whereas arable land fed by irrigation is referred to as saqi = ‘irrigation’ (Gaster 1966: 125, 130 n. 13). Baal was apparently not viewed as the owner and master of land whose fertility was not dependent on the rain he dispensed. A number of studies have been conducted on the climate of Palestine during the Early Bronze Age. There is a growing consensus that there was a marked drying spell at the end of EB III (around 2300 8.ce,) but that during the EB [I-III urban period, the climate was roughly equivalent to what itis today (Donahue 1984; 1985; 2003: 55; Harlan 1981; 2003: 56-61). ‘The paleobotanical assemblages at Bab edh-Dhrat indicate that, during the EB II-III periods, there was a broad spectrum, well-established, intensive agricultural industry in place. The major cereal crops 7. Obviously, over the long-term, the replenishment of the aquifers via rainfall in the catchment area to the east was necessary for the long-term success of the irrigation regimes in the southern Ghor, It seems unlikely that the EB inhabitants of Bab edh-Dhra would have made chis connection.84 Davin McCxeery were barley and wheat, various legumes (e.g, lentil, chickpea, bean, and pea) and a variety of fruits (cg, fig, grape, and olive). Flax, mallow, and Zizyphus also appear to have been cultivated and/or harvested throughout the EB I-III Periods. Viewed in light of what we know about indigenous Ca- naanite religion, it seems likely that the major religious celebrations at Bab edh-Dhra® would have coincided with the three most important agricultural harvests of the yeat—that is: the barley harvest in late spring, the wheat harvest in early summer (along with the harvest of various legumes), and the fruit harvest in the late summer, when at the same time the temperature would have dropped, the rains would have returned, and the celebration of Ba‘al’s resurrection would be celebrated throughout Palestine.* In light of this scenario, itis tempting to think that the religion of the residents of Bab edh- Dhra‘ was very similar to that of the rest of ancient Canaan; but something very different may have taken place in the southern Ghor. By the end of September, when rains commence in the highlands, the temperature of the Jordan Valley cools down but the rainfall of the southern Ghor remains negligible and is never enough to sus- tain agriculture. At Bab edh-Dhra‘, the climatological evidence as well as the paleoboranical evidence (c.g., 6-row barley, emmer wheat, large-seeded flax, etc.), suggests that the EB I-IV periods were hot and dry, and a successful agricultural regime would have depended upon intensive irrigation (MeCreery 1980: 150). This being the case, it seems unlikely that an atmospheric storm-god such as Bafal would be the primary object of devotion. Instead, a deity such as Athtar, the god of the underworld and of sweet water (and therefore of irrigation), would much more likely have been venerated. Whereas in the Ba‘al/Anat cycle, Athtar is found co be unable co assume Ba‘al’s role as ruler (see Coogan 1978: 111) because he does not “measure up” to Ba‘al’s power (that is, because most of Palestine does not have major rivers or springs capable of sustaining agriculture), in an area like the southern Ghor, where rainfall is negligible, but springs are ful and dependable even in periods of relative drought, an underworld god like Achtar might well play a major role. As H. Frankfort pointed out in his classic study, Kingship and the Gods, the dry regions of southern Mesopotamia and Egypt tended to venerate the underground/underworld deities who were viewed as the sources of fertility in the form of springs and rivers rather than the atmospheric gods who seemed to have little power or influence in these arid regions. It seem likely, therefore, that the residents of Bab edh-Dhrif worshiped a deity more like Ath- tar of Canaan or Osiris of Egypt or Dumusi of Mesopotamia rather than the storm-god Ba‘al, despite his predominance in the vicinity: Conclusions Although the inhabitants of Bab edh-Dhra€ would have likely viewed their patron god(s) very dif- ferently from their neighbors in the highlands to the east and west; their major harvest festivals and thus their high holy days would have closely coincided with their highland neighbors. The harvest/ religious festivals would have occurred about one month earlier (due to the elevation and temperature differential), bur the annual celebrations of the barley, wheat, and fruit harvest in the spring, summer, and carly fall/winter, would have been most likely much the same as the celebrations that took place in the highlands. Just as the material culture of Bab edh-Dhra€ exhibits distinctive elements unique to the southern, Ghor as well as many clear parallels to the rest of Palestine, the religious traditions of Bab edh-Dhra most likely reflected the religious traditions of broader Palestine in general, but because of its unique 8. Ie should be noted thar because of the low elevation and unusual environment of the southern Ghor, the cereal and fuit harvests would have taken place as much as one or two months ahead of the corresponding harvests in the highlands Garden crops such as legumes (for example peas, beans, chickpeas, et.) could have been grown throughout the year.Agriculture and Religion at Bab Edh-Dhra® and Numeiva during the Early Bronze Age 85 geographical, ecological, and agricultural environment, the religious understanding of the inhabitants of Bab edh-Dhraf was quite likely very different from that of their cultural cousins in the eastern and western highlands. The huge cemetery at Bab edh-Dhraf, as well as those at Feifeh and Safi to the south, may ultimately provide additional clues regarding the distinctive religious beliefs of the people of the southern Ghor. Ie might well be that the enormous amount of time, energy, and resources devoted to the cemetery reflect a “cult of the dead” that focused on the god(s) of the underworld and perhaps the departed ancestors as primary forces upon which the community depended for its continued existence. ‘The non-urban character of the EB IA and EB IV occupation at Bab edh-Dhrit suggests that the religious traditions during these periods may have differed from those of the EB IB-EB III town site. In particular, the EB IA religious traditions may have been more tribally situated so that, as Jacobsen (1976: 145-64) has suggested, the primary deities may have been viewed primarily as parents or patron gods (rather than primarily fertility gods), similar to what Alt (1968: 386) described as “the god of the fathers” in the early biblical traditions. Although there were certainly developments of the religious traditions of Bab edh-Dhra throughout its 1000+ year history, the continuous use of the cemetery from EB IA-EB IV and the continuity of the paleobotanical assemblages (as well as ceramic traditions) suggests an underlying cultural continuity at Bab edh-Dhra throughout the Early Bronze Age. The material evidence suggests that, from the initial, proto-urban occupation, the history of Bab edh-Dhrat should be viewed primarily as an internal history of evolution and devolution rather than a scenario of innovations (such as urbanization) being introduced from the outside by newcomers (see Schaub and Rast 1989: 556-57). If this conclusion is correct, it also seems likely that the religious traditions of Bab ble, although they almost certainly changed through time in response to shifting cultural, economic, and political realities. ‘Additional research is needed to vest some of the conjectures and conclusions suggested here, which are clearly tentative and open to criticism. It may not be possible ever to understand the reli- gious traditions of Bab edh-Dhra® and Numeira or other Early Bronze Age sites in Palestine beyond general outlines, but I rrust that at least this study has demonstrated thar discussions regarding the ancient religion of Palestine must take seriously the contribution that paleobotanical assemblages and paleoenvironmental studies have to make. An ancient corollary to the modern expression “you are what you eat” might be “your religious beliefs and rituals are shaped by your environment and subsis- tence patterns.” The environment and agricultural regimes may not have “determined” the nature of ancient religion in various parts of Palestine, but they almost certainly were very influential. Paleobo- tanical studies may not be the key to understanding ancient religious traditions, but they should surely be recognized as providing a vital piece of the pu: Works Cited Alt, Albrecht. 1968 God of the Fathers. Pp. 3-100 in Es Wilson. Anchor Books. Garden City, Bentley, Gillian R. 1987. Kinship and Social Seructure at Early Bronze IA Bab edh-Dhra‘, Jordan: A Bioarchaeological Analysis ofthe ‘Mortuary and Dental Data, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago. Coogan, Michael D, 1978. Stories from Ancient Canaan. Louisville, KY: Westminster Press. 1984 Numeira. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 255: 75-81. ‘on Old Testament History and Religion. Translated by R. A. 'Y: Doubleday86 Davin McCxeery Donahue, Jack. 1984 Geologic Reconstruction of Numeira. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 255: 83-88. 1985 Hydrologic and Topographic Change during and After Eatly Bronze Age Occupation at Bab edh- Dhra and Numeira. Pp. 131-40 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I, Amman: Depart ment of Antiquities, 2003 Geology and Geomorphology. Pp. 18-55 in Bab edh-Dhra: Excavations at the Town Site (1975. 1981), by W.E. Rast and R. T. Schaub. Part 1: Text. Reports of the Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan, II. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns Edwards, Phillip C., Steven E. Falconer, PL. Fall, I. Berelov, C. Davies, J. Meadows, C. Megan, M. C, Metzger, and G, J. Sayei 2001 Archaeology and Environment of the Dead Sea Plain: Preliminary Results of the First Season of In- vestigations by the Joint La Trobe University/Arizona State University Project. Annual of the Depart- ‘ment of Antiquities of Jordan 45: 135-57. Edwards, Phillip C., Steven E. Falconer, PL. Fall, . Berelov, J. C: Sayei, T. K. Swoveland, and M. Westaway 2002. Archacology and Environment of the Dead Sea Plain: Preliminary Results of the Second Season of Investigations by the Joint La Trobe University/Arizona State University Project. Annual of the De- partment of Antiquities of Jordan 46: 51-92. Fohrer, Georg 1972 History of Israelite Religion. Translated by D. E. Green. New York: Abingdon. Frankfort, Henti. 1978 Kingship and the Gods: A Study of Ancient Near Eastern Religion as the Integration of Socient and Nature Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Gaster, Theodor H. 1966 Thespis: Ritual, Myth, and Drama in the Ancient Near East. Harper Torchbooks. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers. Harlan, Jack R. 1981 Natural resources of the Southem Ghor. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 46: 155-66. 1985 The Early Bronze Age Environment of the Southern Ghor and the Moab Plateau. Pp. 125-129 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan II. Amman: Department of Antiquities. 2004 Natural Resources of the Bab edh-Dhra Region. Pp. 56-61 in Bab edh-Dhra: Excavations at the Town Site (1975—1981), by W. E. Rast and R. T. Schaub. Part 1: Text. Reports of the Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan, Il. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Jacobson, Thorkild 1976 The Trea Kraus, Hans-Joachim 1965 Worship in Israel. Translated by Geoffrey Buswell. Richmond, Lapp, Paul W. 1965 Bab edh-Dha Fall 1965 Excavations. American School of Oriental Research Newsletter. 1968 Bab edh-Dhrat, Perizttes and Emim. Pp. 1-25 in Jerusalem Through the Ages, Jerusalem: Israel Explo- ration Society. 1975 The Tale ofthe Tell. Edited by Nancy Lapp. Pittsburgh, PA: Pickwick. McCreery, David W. 1980 The Nature and Cultural Implications of Early Bronze Age Agriculture in the Southern Ghor of Jordan — An Archaeological Reconstruction. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh. zasty, C. Day, J. Meadows, C. Meegan, G. J. of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion. New Haven: Yale University Press. John Knox.Agriculture and Religion at Bab Edh-Dhra® and Numeiva during the Early Bronze Age 87 2002 Bronze Age Agriculture in the Dead Sea Basin: The Cases of Bab edh-Dhes‘, Numeira and Tell Nim- rin. Pp. 250-63 in Imagining Biblical Worlds: Studies in Spatial, Social and Historical Constructs in Honor of James W. Flanagan, ed. David M. Gunn and Paula M. McNutt. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement 359. New York: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003 The Paleoethnobotany of Bab edh-Dhrat, Pp. 449-63 in Bab edh-Dhra: Excavations at the Town Site (1975—1981), by W. E. Rast and R. T. Schaub. Part I: Text. Reports of the Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan, II. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Oppenheim, A. Leo. 1964 Ancient Mesopotamia, Chicago: University of Chicago Press Pritchard, James B., ed. 1969. Ancient Near Eastem Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd edition with supplement. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rast, W. E., and Schaub, R. T 1978 A Preliminary Report of Excavations at Bab edh-Dhra, 1975. Pp. 1-31 in Preliminary Excavation Reports: Bab edh-Dhraf, Sardis, Meivon Tell e-Hesi, Carthage (Punic), ed. D.N. Freedman. Ann Arbor, MI: American Schools of Oriental Research, 1980 Preliminary Report of the 1979 Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 240: 21-61. 1981 The Southeastern Dead Sea Plain Expedition: An Interim Report of the 1977 Season. Annual of the Amer- ican Schools of Oriental Research 46. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research 2003 Bab edh-Dhraf: Excavations at the Town Site (19751981). Part 1: Text. Reports of the Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan, 11. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Ringgren, Helmer, 1974 Religions of the Ancient Near East, Translated by John Sturdy. Philadelphia: Westminster Schaub, R. Thomas, and Rast, Walter E, 1984 Preliminary Report of the 1981 Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 254: 35-60. 1989 Bab edh-Dhra*: Excavations in the Cemetery Directed by Paul W. Lapp (1965-67) . Reports of the Expe- dition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan, I. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. ‘Vaux, Roland de 1965 Ancient Israel. 2 vols. New York: McGraw Hill 1970 Palestine During the Neolithic and Chaleolithic Periods. Pp. 208-237 in The Cambridge Ancient History. 3rd ed. Vol. I. Part I. Prolegomena and Prehistory. Eds. I. E. S. Edwards, C. J. Gadd, and N.G. L, Hammond. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressThis page intentionally left blank.