Table of Contents for Maarav 29.1-2 (2025)
Pp. 1-25: 鈥溾�淭he Anger of the Queen Has Gone Forth鈥�: Ilimilku鈥檚 Warning to Urtenu in a Ugaritic Piggyback Letter (RS 94.2406 [KTU3 2.88])鈥� by Heath D. Dewrell
The present essay begins with a reexamination of a 鈥減iggyback鈥� letter from Late Bronze Ugarit, RS 94.2406 (KTU3 2.88), offering a fresh edition of this letter from an unnamed queen of Ugarit to Urtenu that contains a second letter from a certain Ilimilku to the same appended to the end. The edition presented here notes a previously unacknowledged difficulty that, once recognized and accounted for, serves to reveal a degree of tension between the queen of Ugarit and Ilimilku, her scribe. Once properly understood, it becomes clear that Ilimilku鈥檚 piggyback letter at the very least recontextualizes the queen鈥檚 letter and may well even go so far as to contradict the queen鈥檚 instructions outright. The second portion of the essay embarks on a comparison with other analogous piggyback letters from the Late Bronze age, written in both Akkadian and Hittite, to reveal that Ilimilku鈥檚 piggyback letter is hardly unique in these regards and that it was not especially uncommon for scribes to append their own letters to those of their patrons, apparently without the latter鈥檚 knowledge, often with the goal of advancing the scribes鈥� own interests and agendas.
17吃瓜Members with online access: log into ASOR鈥檚 Online Portal . Once logged in, click the JOURNALS tab in the top navigation bar. From here you may select which journal you would like to read. If you have online access, you will see your selected journal鈥檚 current issue Table of Contents. Click on the 鈥淐urrent Issue鈥� button and you will then be redirected to the University of Chicago Press鈥檚 (UCP) platform to immediately start reading any issue of your choice. Tutorials for how to log in to the Online Portal as well as how to navigate to the Portal Journals page can be found here.
Pp. 27-119: 鈥溾�楾he Rise of 鈥淣ational鈥� Scripts in the Iron Age II: A Proposal鈥� by Nathaniel E. Greene and Jeremy M. Hutton
Northwest Semitic paleographic data has inspired a consensus that several 鈥渘ational鈥� scripts had become well-established by the Iron IIB. Many treat these scripts as expressions of self-contained identity. Moreover, they are often framed in ways that gloss over aspects of scribal training. Questions remain, however, regarding the behavioral processes that affected such developments. To account for these processes, we propose a 鈥渇ranchise鈥� model of scribal training: a few centers produced scribal lineages that, once established, operated semi-independently. While some scribes may have been held 鈥渙n retainer,鈥� most likely hired themselves out on a localized 鈥渇reelance鈥� system. The selection of national scripts was thus inadvertent and not motivated by exertions of 鈥渘ational鈥� identity. Royal courts of the Iron Age IIB unintentionally adopted 鈥渕icro-features鈥� of the alphabetic script that had been formalized in the scribal lineage(s) prestigious enough to enjoy employment in major centers. Rather than serving as a distinctive marker of national consciousness imposed from the top-down, the development of 鈥渘ational scripts鈥� was the natural effect of local patronage and 鈥渆lite emulation鈥� of micro-features by more peripheral scribes. The nationalization of scripts was therefore incidental to the emergent national consciousness and driven by individual scribes and the training regimens connecting them.
17吃瓜Members with online access: log into ASOR鈥檚 Online Portal . Once logged in, click the JOURNALS tab in the top navigation bar. From here you may select which journal you would like to read. If you have online access, you will see your selected journal鈥檚 current issue Table of Contents. Click on the 鈥淐urrent Issue鈥� button and you will then be redirected to the University of Chicago Press鈥檚 (UCP) platform to immediately start reading any issue of your choice. Tutorials for how to log in to the Online Portal as well as how to navigate to the Portal Journals page can be found here.
Pp. 121-178: 鈥淐onflate Readings and the Lamentations Textual Tradition鈥� by F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp
One dimension of Lamentations鈥檚 textual tradition, namely, its propensity for conflate readings, provides the chief focus of inquiry in this essay. As I work to collect, elucidate, and clarify these conflate readings, other dimensions of these poems鈥� extant and reconstructable textualities come into view, viz. their rough chronology, prevalence of variability and multiformity. The phenomenon of conflate readings is well known to textual scholars of the Bible. The presenting peculiarity in Lamentations is the breakage in form to no apparent end that the preservation of such readings inevitably entails. Given how integral form is to this poetry鈥檚 operative poetics, such deformations require explanation. The solution posed posits shifts over time in the literary values that guided scribal practice when it came to the collecting and recording of variant readings. The resulting view of Lamentations鈥檚 literary history is far richer, more complex, and truer to scribal realia than that usually presumed by students of these poems.
17吃瓜Members with online access: log into ASOR鈥檚 Online Portal . Once logged in, click the JOURNALS tab in the top navigation bar. From here you may select which journal you would like to read. If you have online access, you will see your selected journal鈥檚 current issue Table of Contents. Click on the 鈥淐urrent Issue鈥� button and you will then be redirected to the University of Chicago Press鈥檚 (UCP) platform to immediately start reading any issue of your choice. Tutorials for how to log in to the Online Portal as well as how to navigate to the Portal Journals page can be found here.
17吃瓜is gearing up for our 
Albright鈥檚 excavations at Tell Beit Mirsim marked a turning point in the development of Biblical Archaeology, establishing the site as a key type-site for the discipline. The innovative methods applied in both excavation and publication resonated for decades and provided the foundation for Albright鈥檚 wide-ranging synthetic studies. Over time, however, many of his conclusions and theories have been challenged and re-evaluated. The renewed excavations at Tell Beit Mirsim invite a fresh assessment of Albright鈥檚 work, comparing his insights with new evidence from the field. This presentation will reconsider the validity of his reports in light of modern scholarship and reflect on the enduring impact of his excavations.
Dr. Igor Kreimerman is a Senior Lecturer in Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He directs the Selz Foundation Hazor Excavations in Memory of Yigael Yadin and serves as scientific 
advisor to the Renewed Excavations at Tell Beit Mirsim. His research focuses on the social and economic structures of Bronze and Iron Age Levantine societies, as well as on human-induced site formation processes, particularly those related to construction and destruction.
Rachel Hallote is Professor of History at Purchase College SUNY. Her research involves British and American archaeologists who excavated in Ottoman-controlled Palestine in the 19th century. She has worked at numerous archaeological sites in Israel, including Tell Miqne and Megiddo. Her publications include Bible, Map, and Spade: The American Exploration Society, Frederick Jones Bliss, and the Forgotten Story of Early American Biblical Archaeology and the co-authored volume, The Photographs of the American Palestine Exploration Society as well as many articles about archaeology and the history of the discipline. She currently co-hosts an archaeology podcast called This Week in the Ancient Near East.
The episode of Alexander鈥檚 visit to Jerusalem is familiar mostly through the story of Flavius Josephus. This version of the story dominates not only the public imagination but also scholarly discussion. It is generally assumed that Josephus鈥� story is derived from the earliest source(s) relating the story; it is consequently also the most often discussed in scholarship, mostly at the expense of any discussion of the other versions of the story. A main conclusion of Dr. Amitay鈥檚 recent book, Alexander the Great in Jerusalem: Myth and History聽(2025, Oxford UP), is that among the four different versions of the Alexander in Jerusalem story 鈥� which are quite different from one another 鈥� Josephus鈥� version is not the earliest but rather the latest, and clearly relies on two earlier versions. A second conclusion, which conforms with the consensus of previous scholarship, is that the story, in all its versions, cannot be regarded as history; it is a political myth. Therefore, rather than look in the stories for clues that might reveal some details about the history of Alexander, Dr. Amitay analyzed each of the stories for indicators that would reveal the respective contexts of their creation.
All these contexts taken together bring us to the third major conclusion, a common denominator that dominates the tradition as a whole: new stories of Alexander in Jerusalem (at least the ones that reached us) were born as a result of a major change in the relationship between the people of Judea and their foreign rulers. These major changes include the Seleukid takeover of the southern Levant, the first arrival of Roman arms in Judea, the abolishment of Judean kingship and the institution of provincia Judaea, and the rearrangement of Judea as an independent province after the destruction of the temple. Given the continued status of Judea as a province of some empire or other during the second temple period (Hasmonean period excluded), and the suddenness and totality of the change brought about by Alexander, it is small wonder that his arrival in Jerusalem became the subject of political myths dealing with major shifts in the relationship of Judea with its foreign rulers.
For the last twenty odd years, Ory Amitay has been teaching and conducting research in the University of Haifa. His research is situated at the intersection of two crossroads: one between myth and history, the other between various peoples of the ancient west. The topic of his new book, and of this lecture, is a clear example. Amitay鈥檚 main research strategy in analyzing historical (or rather pseudo-historical) myths is locating the obvious false factoids 鈥� parts of the story that are in blatant contradiction to known historical facts 鈥� and interpreting them not as the products of carelessness or ignorance, but rather as intentional fabrications. As such, they have both a context, where they make sense historically, and an agenda. The underlying assumption is that false factoids are fabricated with a purpose in mind. The goal is to identify both context and agenda.
The Carolyn Midkiff Strange Committee on Growth, Innovation, and Visibility (GIV) serves as a resource for and leader in engaging and broadening the professional community of ASOR, in order to expand access to the 聽history and cultures served by ASOR. For more information about the committee, click 
Since the release of Raiders of the Lost Ark, the Ark of the Covenant has become one of, if not the most famous biblical 鈥渁rtifact,鈥� despite the fact that scholars don鈥檛 agree on what might have happened to it or if it even really existed. Described in the Bible as a wooden chest plated with gold, adorned by cherubim, the Ark is said to have carried the tablets of the Ten Commandments and was one of the locations where God manifested His presence amongst the Israelites. The description may be straightforward and simple, but the Ark has proven to be the subject of a diverse variety of interpretations since biblical times, ranging from an imitation of an ancient Egyptian religious object to an advanced radioactive energy source capable of mass destruction. Ethiopian Christians believe the Ark resides in a church in Africa, while some have looked for it in the ancient Irish city of Tara. Early religious interpreters looked for coded messages in the biblical instructions on how to build the Ark, and modern faith communities build their own replica Arks for use in faith healing services and in Old Testament themed wax museums. All of these communities generally agree on what the Ark looked like, but what the Ark is or was, and why it matters is a different story. Join Kevin McGeough, in a lecture and conversation moderated by Jennie Ebeling and William Caraher, as he 
explores the interpretation of the Ark of the Covenant from the past two thousand years. Introducing his new book, Readers of the Lost Ark, Kevin will discuss how the Ark has been understood in different communities, from ancient Jewish and Christian commentators, through Medieval theologians, to modern ancient aliens theorists, misguided explorers, and Indiana Jones fan communities. There will be something for any 鈥渇riend of ASOR鈥� interest in this wide-ranging talk!
Kevin M. McGeough is Professor of Archaeology in the Department of Geography & Environment at the University of Lethbridge and holds a Board of Governor鈥檚 Research Chair in Archaeological Theory and Reception. McGeough is currently co-director of excavations at Busayra in Jordan and Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump UNESCO World Heritage Site in Canada. He is co-editor of the journal Alberta Archaeological Review, and author of The Ancient Near East in the Nineteenth Century, and Representations of Antiquity in Film: From Griffith to Grindhouse. His most recent book, Readers of the Lost Ark: Imagining the Ark of the Covenant from Ancient Times to the Present is available from Oxford University Press.
Jennie Ebeling is a Professor of Archaeology in the Department of Archaeology and Anthropology at the University of Evansville. Ebeling co-directed the Jezreel Expedition in Israel and is a ground stone artifact specialist with a particular interest in women鈥檚 contributions to food and drink technologies in ancient southwest Asia. She edits ASOR鈥檚 Archaeological Reports Series and is an editor-at-large for Eisenbrauns, an imprint of Penn State University Press. The co-editor of five volumes, she is the author of Women鈥檚 Lives in Biblical Times (T&T Clark, Int鈥檒) and is currently completing a monograph on ethnography, household archaeology, and representations of life in biblical Israel.
Bill Caraher teaches in the Department of History and American Indian Studies at the University of North Dakota. He is the editor of the Annual of 17吃瓜and co-edited the Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Archaeology (2019) and recently published The Archaeology of Contemporary America (2025). He is an archaeologist who has worked in Greece, Cyprus, and the United States.