Proto-Aeolic Capital Associated with Judah’s Longest Spring Tunnel

Investigating royal iconography and large-scale construction in Iron Age Judah

A stylized palm tree motif is carved onto this proto-aeolic discovery associated with a remarkable Iron Age spring tunnel system near Jerusalem. Photo courtesy of Binyamin Tropper.

In January 2014, Arutz-7 announced that they would reveal the location of a “covered up” proto-aeolic capital that they labeled “King David’s Castle.” While the relationship to King David was unsubstantiated and sensational, the proto-aeolic capital is part of an undoubtedly important archaeological site just over five miles from Jerusalem’s City of David and four miles from Bethlehem. The find itself—a one-of-a-kind proto-aeolic capital still attached to its base—is a rare-yet-iconic First Temple period type. The iconography is familiar in Israel; proto-aeolic designs are etched on modern Israeli five-shekel coins.

The capital is associated with a 525-foot-long tunnel system, the largest and most impressively hewn spring tunnel in the region of Jerusalem. This labor required to carve such a system opens new questions regarding the Judahite administration and agriculture around Jerusalem. Unfortunately, most of last year’s discussion hinged on media reports of the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) response to the Kfar Etzion Field School’s attempts to publicize the find. The archaeological significance was all but ignored.

Last summer I had the chance to meet with Binyamin Tropper, the Kfar Etzion training coordinator who recognized the capital in February 2013, and Daniel Ein-Mor, the IAA archaeologist who previously surveyed the area, identified the capital, explored the water system and recently published the site (see notes below). Media articles last spring portrayed the Kfar Etzion and IAA camps in a pitched battle over the discovery’s public presentation. I saw no indication of hostile contention—both Ein-Mor and Tropper were cordial and enthusiastic in sharing information about the site.

Before discussing the ancient evidence, we need to address the elephant in the room: the articles last year suggesting that the IAA “covered up” the discovery. While there are modern political sensitivities surrounding the location of the site, Bible History Daily is not the place for such discussion. It is a place for the presentation of archaeological data, so first and foremost, it is important to rectify the notion that this site remains quietly unpublished. Last year, Daniel Ein-Mor and geologist Zvi Ron published the article “An Iron Age Royal Tunnel Spring in the region of Nahal Rephaim” in Guy Stiebel et. al (eds.), New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Region. Ein-Mor also published a shorter free online report “Walajeh (‘Ain Joweizeh)” on the IAA Hadashot Arkheologiyot website last summer.

The Proto-Aeolic Typology

In his article “The Origin and Date of the Volute Capitals from the Levant,” Tel Aviv University Professor Oded Lipschits introduces the type:

The Iron Age volute capitals (the so-called “Proto-Aeolic” or “Proto-Ionian” capitals) are among the most impressive and special finds discovered in archaeological excavations in Israel and Jordan. The size of the capitals, their weight, the quality of their carving, and their impressive design provide an indication of their function in the gates and palaces of the ancient kingdoms of Israel, Judah, Moab, and Ammon.

Proto-aeolic capitals have been uncovered at dozens of Israelite and Judahite sites. The proto-aeolic palmetto iconography is often associated with Israelite kingship, and the motif is minted on the modern Israeli five-shekel coin.

The capitals—an architectural term usually referring to decorative supports on top of columns—are widely associated with monumental sites but are poorly understood, in large part because they have rarely been found in situ. Proto-aeolic capitals are decorated with curving date palm tree motifs, associated with the Near Eastern “Tree of Life,” and the architectural style was influential in shaping later architecture from classical Greece to Mesopotamia.

Where have these capitals been found? In the Hadashot Arkheologiyot article “Walajeh (‘Ain Joweizeh),” Daniel Ein-Mor succinctly lists the existing evidence of proto-aeolic capitals, citing a Hebrew article published by Oded Lipschits in 2009:

Twenty-four stone capitals decorated with a Proto-Aeolic design from the First Temple period are known from the main cities of the Kingdom of Israel: Samaria, Megiddo, Hazor and Dan. Eleven others are known from the Kingdom of Judea [Judah]; ten capitals were found at Ramat Rahel where remains of a palace from the late eighth–early seventh centuries BCE were excavated, and one capital comes from the City of David excavations in Jerusalem (Lipschits 2009). Five capitals are known from the site of el-Mudeibi’ – Mudaybi in Moab, and a capital was found in secondary use in the village of ‘Ain-Sara, west of Kerak, next to a spring of the same name. Two fragments of capitals are also known from the citadel in Amman (Lipschits 2009). The capitals from the Kingdom of Israel mainly date to the ninth century BCE and those from Judea and Jordan to the late eighth or early seventh centuries BCE. Although the central motif is identical, the capitals from the various sites differ in some features.

In “The Origin and Date of the Volute Capitals from the Levant,” Lipschits suggests that capitals were first made during Israel’s Omride dynasty in the 9th century B.C.E. He proposes that after the Assyrians invaded Israel, the capitals’ “size, esthetics and quality, attracted the attention of the Assyrian rulers who were known for their adoption of artistic and architectural elements, and for incorporating them in the local Assyrian tradition.” We have artistic depictions of these capitals at numerous palatial Assyrian sites. Lipschits goes on to suggest that the proto-aeolic capitals found in Judah, Moab and Ammon, which were built later than the examples found in Israel, reflect “Assyrian encouragement, approval or sponsorship.”
 


 
As the point where three of the world’s major religions converge, Israel’s history is one of the richest and most complex in the world. Sift through the archaeology and history of this ancient land in the free eBook Israel: An Archaeological Journey, and get a view of these significant Biblical sites through an archaeologist’s lens.
 

 
However, to understand the type, we also need to look west. Haifa University scholar Norma Franklin draws parallels between the capitals and Cypriote architecture, focusing on the similarity between the proto-aeolic motifs and those found in tombs at Tamassos in Cyprus. In her article “From Megiddo to Tamassos and Back: Putting the ‘Proto-Ionic Capital’ in Its Place,” Franklin suggests that these “capitals” were never, in fact, used structurally as capitals. Instead she notes a variety of functions from site to site: they served as column bases, support for wooden objects or other non-structural roles within monumental architecture. There is little evidence that proto-aeolic capitals were ever used as structural column capitals, and the phrase persists more due to common usage than accuracy. The proto-aeolic “capital” associated with the Judahite water system is actually a design carved into a monolithic rock.

A New Proto-Aeolic Capital

The recently announced proto-aeolic capital, associated with the ‘Ain Joweizeh water system, is the first ever found still attached to its base. Originally identified as a lintel in a 1982 survey of the water tunnel, the hewn proto-aeolic decoration is part of a massive, partially buried rock that likely weighs several tons, suggesting that it hasn’t moved far from its original location. The decorations—which are undoubtedly carved in the proto-aeolic style—are actually part of a monolithic rock that may have been part of a monumental entranceway.

In terms of style, the proto-aeolic decoration is most similar to examples from nearby Ramat Rahel and the City of David, but parallels can also be drawn between the capital and examples from Moabite el-Mudeibi‘ and Cypriote Tamassos.

Proto-aeolic capitals have rarely been discovered in situ, and despite the name, there is little evidence that the capitals sat atop columns as architectural elements. This new find is carved from a monolithic rock--while still attached to its base, it is not part of a traditional column. Photo courtesy Binyamin Tropper.

The Hadashot Arkheologiyot report by Daniel Ein-Mor featured the following reconstruction of the partially exposed rock featuring the proto-aeolic element. This may have formed a monumental entrance to the water system or reservoir, along with another nearby--but unexcavated--monolith. IAA: http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=2275

The capital sits in a “seam” (to borrow a phrase from Daniel Ein-Mor’s Hadashot Arkheologiyot report) between an earlier and later phase of the water tunnel’s construction. It sits across from another unexcavated massive stone monolith. One likely possibility is that the capital marked an entrance to the water system after the first phase of construction. If this marks an entrance, there is good reason to believe that the nearby-but-unexcavated stone across from the proto-aeolic capital may be another capital, and the two together framed a monumental entrance to the tunnel or the system’s reservoir.

The Walajeh or ‘Ain Joweizeh Water System

The ‘Ain Joweizeh tunnels are the largest and most elegantly carved karstic water system in the region. Despite the massive effort required to carve such a tunnel, it did not draw a great deal of water. Photo courtesy Binyamin Tropper.

Daniel Ein-Mor was quick to caution me: “We don’t want to overlook the importance of a site because one aspect is attractive—the capital is attracting attention, but the water system itself is at least as interesting.” I have to agree.

We know of over 100 spring tunnels in the area, and none is even half as long as the ‘Ain Joweizeh system. It is a massive effort to cut through hard dolomite rock. The even and measured chisel marks in the Iron Age tunnel reveal that it is a masterpiece of construction, one that would have required a great deal of funding. Unlike Hezekiah’s tunnel, which carries water drawn from Jerusalem’s Gihon Spring, the Joweizeh tunnel drew its water from springs en route. The Joweizeh tunnel is the longest tunnel of its type in the region. Because of the similarity in workmanship, it is worth comparing this tunnel with Hezekiah’s, as Todd Bolen notes on the Bibleplaces blog.

Despite the extensive labor required to carve the tunnel (which includes a side channel used to regulate uneven water flow), the spring itself is relatively low flow, raising questions about its purpose. Who would have cut the hard dolomite rock and haul it hundreds of feet out of the tunnel? The tunnel does not reach Jerusalem. Where was this water going? Why was this elaborate tunnel marked by a proto-aeolic capital, a type often associated with royal construction?
 


 
For a look at the most famous water system in the Biblical world, visit the BAS Hezekiah’s Tunnel page.
 

 

Interpreting the Finds

This site has not escaped the attention of the Israeli archaeological community. Binyamin Tropper mentioned the site’s visitors, and his list included some of the most esteemed names in the field: Nadav Na’aman, Israel Finkelstein, Yuval Gadot, Amihai Mazar, Yosef Garfinkel, Norma Franklin and several others.

This Assyrian relief from the palace of Assurbanipal at Nineveh (now housed at the British Museum) shows a structure with proto-aeolic capitals atop a garden and a stream. Some believe this artistic comparison could help archaeologists understand the relationship between the water tunnel and capital.

Such a water system suggests the presence of a nearby settlement or wealthy estate (Daniel Ein-Mor specifically mentions the possibility of a royal palace or estate similar to Ramat Rahel), but so far there is no archaeological evidence of such a place. A proto-aeolic capital at ‘Ain-Sara in Jordan may be associated with a spring. Assyrian reliefs from Khorsabad and Nineveh show proto-aeolic capitals associated with gardens and springs. Following Oded Lipschits’s proposal that the capitals originated in Israel and were subsequently adopted by Assyrians before being introduced into Judah and other nearby territories, perhaps the usage shown in Assyrian reliefs would have been familiar to anyone considering constructing proto-aeolic capitals in Judah.

Of course, archaeologists have not yet uncovered anything resembling a Judahite or Assyrian-style garden estate in the area, and we can’t base assumptions about the nature of the region from a few foreign artworks. What we know now is that the construction of this water system required a great deal of labor, and someone—perhaps the Judahite government—was willing to invest a great deal in an as-yet archaeologically inconspicuous part of the hinterlands of Jerusalem.
 


 

Notes

Daniel Ein-Mor and Zvi Ron, “An Iron Age Royal Tunnel Spring in the region of Nahal Rephaim” in G. Stiebel et. al (eds.), New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Region (Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority and Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013).

Daniel Ein-Mor, “Walajeh (‘Ain Joweizeh).Hadashot Arkheologiyot (Online: Israel Antiquities Authority: Published 06/16/2013 http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=2275)

Oded Lipschits, “The Origin and Date of the Volute Capitals from the Levant.” in: Israel Finkelstein and Nadav Na’aman, eds., The Fire Signals of Lachish: Studies in the Archaeology and History of Israel in the Late Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Persian Period in Honor of David Ussishkin. (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2011). pp. 203-225.

Norma Franklin, “From Megiddo to Tamassos and Back: Putting the ‘Proto-Ionic Capital’ in its Place.” in: Israel Finkelstein and Nadav Na’aman, eds., The Fire Signals of Lachish: Studies in the Archaeology and History of Israel in the Late Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Persian Period in Honor of David Ussishkin. (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2011). pp. 129-140.
 


 
Originally published January 2014, updated May 2014.

Posted in Artifacts and the Bible, Biblical Archaeology Places, News.

Tagged with , , , , , , .

Add Your Comments

6 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Paul says

    This article was thirst quenching and left me curious if we have here a representation of a stylized Garden of Eden with its motif of rivers and palm trees; the “Tree of Life” originating from southern Mesopotamia. The location of this site being four miles from Bethlehem, where Matthew and Luke place the birth of Jesus, makes it a possible location for the Christian birth narrative in the Islamic tradition of the story of Mary (Koran 19:22-25). Mary retires to a remote place, and when she goes into labor she finds a palm tree and cries out in anguish, upon which a voice reveals that there is also a river beneath the tree.
    In a work of Jewish mysticism that first appeared in southern France (end of 12th century C.E.), the Book of Bahir contains references to palm trees. One such interpretation alters the verse in the Song of Songs 7:8, from “Your stately form is like the palm,” to “Your structure is like the palm” (“The Bahir”, by Aryah Kaplan, p. 62). This calls to mind the archetectual design of the Proto-Aeolic pillars with palm fronds adorning temples and palaces. Elsewhere (The Bahir, p. 80) we have an interpretation of the date palm as being both male and female, as it is written; “Male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27). It is a theme we find in the Kabbalah that likely had its origins in Gnosticism that hints at God’s essence as being comprised of both male and female genders.
    Gershom Scholem writes in his “Origins of the Kabbalah” (p.172) that in the Bahir, “reference is made to the bisexual character of the palm tree, which was apparently known to the authors from their own observation. This would bring us back again to the Orient, where the cultivation of the date palm occupies so prominent a place.”

  2. Bud says

    The king of Sodom went out to meet Abram at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king’s dale. And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine (Genesis 14:17-18). The ‘Ain Joweizeh water system would have been the ideal location for such a meeting. Absalom reared up for himself a pillar, which is in the king’s dale:and he called the pillar after his own name: and it is called unto this day, Absalom’s place (II Samuel 18:18). Notice they called it Absalom’s place. The proximity of the spring, relative to Hebron, Jerusalem, and Sodom, makes this an ideal candidate for just such a place. Imagine stopping there for water on a hot day, being able to enjoy the relatively cool atmosphere inside the cave. If the Proto-Aeolic capital gracing the top of the massive pillar found there didn’t date to the 8th century BCE, I would hazard a guess that Absalom’s pillar itself has been found.

  3. Paul says

    Looking through old issues of BAR, I realized that I was too hasty identifying Ain Joweizeh with the possible location of Mary’s resting place. In the article “Where Mary Rested” (BAR Nov./Dec, 2006), This story began in a 2nd century apocryphal gospel “Protovangelium of James,” that describes Joseph leaving Mary at a cave within 3 miles of Bethlehem. Mary cannot wait for Joseph to return with a midwife and she gives birth in the cave. During the 6th century. the Kathisma Church was built on the site where it was believed Mary stopped, which happens to be the site of Ramet Rahel where 10 Proto-Aeolic capitols were found mentioned in the above article.
    After the Arab conquest this structure was converted into a mosque and there is a floor mosaic of a palm tree (p.51), possibly added by Muslims to harmonize the Koranic tradition with the Christian. The tree has two clumps of dates hanging down on either side and is flanked by two smaller trees on either side as if off in a distance, with each of them having two clumps of dates.

  4. Giles says

    I don’t see any proto-Aeolic capitals in those Assyrian reliefs? Anyone got a clearer picture of one?

Continuing the Discussion

  1. The Spring With the Proto-Aeolic Capital: Royal-Estate Related? | Against Jebel al-Lawz linked to this post on January 15, 2014

    [...] area watered by the spring and tunnel is surprisingly small, being less than half a kilometer long. This article capably summarizes the info about the site, but is utterly incorrect in one major detail: the [...]

  2. The Pools of Solomon | Ferrell's Travel Blog linked to this post on January 19, 2014

    [...] Daily includes photos of the Proto-Aeolic Capital associated with the recently discovered tunnel here. Share this:PrintFacebookEmailLike this:Like [...]


Some HTML is OK

or, reply to this post via trackback.


Enter Your Log In Credentials

Change Password

×