JOURNAL OF JEWISH STUDIES, VOL. L, NO. 2, AUTUMN 1999 .... on Parian pillars' (The Book of Esther 1:6): Bible, Midrash and Real Marble in the Ancient Near East MOSHE FISCHER Tel Aviv University T he topic of this paper is a re-examination of several historical sources Tregarding the presence of marble in the Land of Israel and their relationship with archaeological and laboratory analysis. We start with a short survey of the use of marble and the trade in this commodity, and then deal with the place marble had in ancient Israel. Finally, we present the sources we have chosen as relevant to the origin of marble used in this part of the Mediterranean. Some concluding remarks emphasize the relationships between the different kinds of information we have used here. Marble, Marble Trade and Marmorariii In ancient Greece marble was used both for architecture and sculpture from the archaic period onwards.2 This tradition was continued during the Hellenistic period as well when marble was used all over the hellenized world, the Near East included. After discovering its existence in the monumental architecture of Hellenistic Greece and Asia Minor, the Romans developed a special predilection for marble. According to Latin authors from the first centuries BCE and CE (e.g. Horace, Carmina 2.18; Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistolae Morales 86.6-7), Roman society made extensive and even excessive use of marble, which is fully borne out by archaeological remains. From the first century onwards the Romans developed architecture and art in marble based on Greek imports introduced by Greek artisans, the first marmorarii. Under Augustus, of whom Suetonius (Div. Aug. 28.3) said that he left behind him a Rome 'marmoream quam latericiam accepisset', Italian marble from Luni/Carrara became the main source of marble supply, as it is still today for the modern luxury market. Importation and use of marble became . The examination of this topic has been made possible while enjoying the hospitality of the German Institute of Archaeology (DAI), Berlin in September-October 1997. Thanks are due to the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Professor Helmut Kyrieleis, President of the DAI, and Dr Simone Wolf A first version of this paper was presented at the First International Conference on the Archaeology ofParos and the Cyclades 'Paria Lithos', held on Paros, 2-5 October 1997, of which an abstract will be published in its Proceedings. The choice of this topic was stimulated by the invitation to attend this conference. I am grateful to Professor Demetrios Schilardi for inviting me to this successful conference organized by him. I have benefited from valuable discussions with Tz. Grossmark (Kibbutz Amir, Israel), J. Herrmann (Boston), Annewies van den Hoek (Boston), G. Stemberger (Vienna) and S. Weingarten (Tel Aviv). l Summing up here the first chapter of my recently published Marble Studies (Fischer 1998). 2 Martin 1965, 135-144. 236 JOURNAL OF JEWISH STUDIES representative of the revolution in the concepts of architectural planning, design and decoration. Marble even became a symbol of the linkage between Rome and the provinces. Cities in Asia Minor in the Flavian period started to develop a richly styled veneer finish, the so-called 'Marmorstil', which was diffused all over the Mediterranean due to the economic rationalization of this art industry together with a highly developed system of transport by sea, river and overland. During the second and third centuries CE the main cities of almost all Roman provinces were decorated with marble monuments, Roman Palestine included.3 Marble in Ancient Israel Written sources for the artistic development of the Near East in general and ancient Israel in particular during the Hellenistic and Roman periods are rather scarce. In particular, there is very little information about the origin and importation of marble to this region. A lone exception is represented by the writings of Flavius Josephus, particularly in his descriptions of Herod's building projects. However in saying that these buildings were built of marble Josephus is simply misleading the reader.4 Subsequent massive use of imported marble for architecture and sculpture, mainly during the Roman imperial period is known to us not from written sources but from archaeological finds.5 Both archaeological and laboratory examinations have revealed that marble was imported into the Land of Israel from various sources all over the Mediterranean. Marble reached the country from the Hellenistic period onwards, and later larger transports are known from the Byzantine period. The main period, however, during which marble was used in the Land of Israel for architecture, sculpture and sarcophagi was the Roman period, namely the second and third centuries CE. After the foundation of the Roman province of Syria-Palaestina the main cities of the country were embellished with marble brought mainly from Asia Minor, but sometimes also from Greece and Italy. The cities of Caesarea Maritima, Ascalon and Scythopolis received new civic and religious structures built of marble, thus competing with other main cities of the Empire.6 3 For summaries on this issue see Herz-Waelkens (eds.) 1988; cf. Fant 1989, and, recently Fischer 1998. 4 Fischer-Stein 1994. 5 See Fischer 1998, passim, and map Fig. Dl. 6 I made a first resume of the state of research into the presence of imported marble in Ancient Israel at the First ASMOSIA (Association for the Study of Marble and Other Stones Used in Antiquity) Conference in 1988 at Pisa thanks to the scientific support provided by Norman Herz. I am deeply grateful to Norman Herz for his consequent support and encouragement. Since then a variety of marble items found in Israel have been analyzed and published. A systematic analysis of the marble has been carried out by Ze'ev Pearl from the Weizman Institute of Science at Rehovot/Israel. Preliminary results of his research have already been published in the past years, whereas a concluding survey of the work is included in my Marble Studies (Fischer 1998). '... ON PARIAN PILLARS' (THE BOOK OF ESTHER 1:6) 237 A glance at the laboratory results published by Pearl (Fischer 1998) is sufficient to demonstrate that the number of marble sources used to supply Ancient Israel with marble is rather limited. On the other hand, a tendency can be observed towards the development of certain preferences for particular types of imports: thus the marble sources supplying material for architecture differ from the sources for sculpture, including sarcophagi. For architectural items (facades, columns and capitals) Proconnesus/ Marmara (Asia Minor) is the main supplier. In contrast to architectural decoration, an analysis of sculpture points to a greater variety of sources, such as the quarries of Paros, Pentelikon, Thasos and Hymmetus, and perhaps Carrara. A comparison between the different centres makes it evident, however, that the contribution of each quarry to the sculpture of Roman Palestine is different. Thus, for Caesarea the quarries of Afyon, Pentelikon, Marmara and Thasos are the main suppliers, whereas for Scythopolis, Thasos is the main supplier and Marmara is almost totally absent. Also of some interest is the attribution to Carrara of a cuirassed emperor's statue from Samaria-Sebaste, as pointed out to me by Norman Herz as long ago as 1988. As for sarcophagi, there is a difference between their marble composition in Caesarea and in other centres. In Caesarea, there is an almost ideal identity between the artistic design and the marble sources of the sarcophagi: thus, Attic sarcophagi are of Pentelic marble, whereas the Asiatic types are of Proconnesian marble. In other centres, however, a different picture was revealed: thus, the isotopic analysis of an Attic sarcophagus from Ascalon points to an origin in Asia Minor, from Afyon or Usak. The marble of two sarcophagi of the 'stadtromisch-type' from Turmus Aya and Ascalon also points to an origin in Asia Minor, supporting the theory that there were Oriental workshops trained in a 'western-Roman' fashion. The picture revealed here seems to correspond with the situation in the southeastern Mediterranean, as for example at Lepcis Magna. Thus it seems likely that during the Roman and Late Roman Period there was an increase in the use of marble from Asia Minor, to the point of nearexclusivity. On the other hand, the results of the analyses provided by the laboratories leave the door open for some other intrusions, including marble from Paros. Marble in Biblical Sources and their Later Versions As stated before, since there are so few sources mentioning the origin and uses of marble, even the slightest indication is of a special interest, especially when the source discussed is the Bible. Marble is mentioned several times in the Bible, either as 7w or as tft: in the Song of Songs 5:15, in 1 Chronicles 29:2, and in the book of Esther 1:6. The latter is of particular interest mainly for the versions which have been preserved from late antiquity. We shall therefore be especially concerned with this, while the other references will be considered later. The book of Esther is set in Persia. Describing the palace of the King Ahasueros in Shushan [Susa], the text says (1:6): 238 JOURNAL OF JEWISH STUDIES This text is dated to the late Persian/early Hellenistic period,8 for which it seems that further explanations concerning the origin of the marble were probably unnecessary.9 Many of the words involved are of a technical or uncertain meaning, while the Greek of the LXX (see below) does not help, apart from showing how doublets develop from a misunderstanding of the Hebrew. Thus the Hebrew words nnbnl 'VTl are translated KUKAQW p68a reirao[Eva'and roses in a circle'! It seems that the author used foreign words and hapax legomena to increase the exotic effect. The translation of this passage in Targum Rishon'o rather preserves the original Hebrew version, beside the use of some Greek or Hellenized terms such as marmerin for marble (cf. Krauss 1910, 353). (1) The LXX version of the passage of the Book of Esther1' analyzed by us reads as follows: . . .7TOpLpUpOL 1TtL Kt#OLe XpuooS Kai dpyvpoLS, EMTL a7AAOL9 lraptVOLS KALvaL xpvcaF Kam &pyvpaL E7I AtOoaTpcrov orapayStTov ALOov 1Tapivov A'O.ov Kai Kat At9votS'g STLVLVOV Kam 12 In this description is included an explicit mention of the origin of the marble, which we are told was from Paros, as were the stones of the pavement also. It is perhaps noteworthy that out of many marble quarries known in the Mediterranean world in antiquity,13 the LXX authors chose the famous 7 'The courtyard was decorated with curtains which were fastened to pillars of marble; the beds were of gold and silver, upon a pavement of red, and blue, and white, and black marble' (The Holy Bible, King James Version, American Bible Society, New York, 489). For another modern English version see The Anchor Bible: A New Translation (by C. A.Moore, New York, 1982). 8 At least the core of the Book of Esther should be dated to late Persian and early Hellenistic periods; see ABD 2, 633 (C. A. Moore, 1992). 9 However, the question where the marble would have come from for such a palace in Susa is of interest for itself; for Persian monumental building projects and Greek-Persian artistic interactions involved with them see Ghirshman 1954, 164-181; Boardman 1980, 102-105; for one of the case studies: Kawami 1986. 10 Vol. 18, The Two Targums of Esther (ed. B. Grossfield, Edinburgh, 1991). It is worthy of mention that this passage is lacking in Targum Sheni. I owe this point to Professor G. Stemberger (Vienna). 1l For the LXX see Septuaginta. Idest Vetus Testamentum Graece Iuxta LXXInterpretes Editit Alfred Rahlfs (Gbttingen, 1962), pp. XXII XXXI. For a summary of the Septuagint studies, see recently Dorival-Harl-Munnich 1994 and Dogniez 1995. 12 We follow here the version of Origenes Hexaplorum quae supersunt sive veterum interpretum Graecorum in totum Vetus Testamentum Fragmenta I (Oxford, 1875), Esther 1:6, based on Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum Esther (ed. R. Hanhart, Gottingen, 1983), and Septuaginta. Idest Vetus Testamentum Graece luxta LXXInterpretes Editit Alfred Rahlfs, Gottingen, 1962, pp. XXII-XXXI) using Codex Vaticanus (fourth century CE), Codex Sinaiticus (British Museum), Codex Alexandrinus (London, British Museum, mid-fifth century CE). 13 Summed up by us, Fischer 1998. ... 239 ON PARIAN PILLARS' (THE BOOK OF ESTHER 1:6) marble from Paros'4 to illustrate the richness of the palace.'" That the word 7rapivos is used as a more general geographic term regarding marble from Paros,16 instead of the more specifically characterizing terms such as Ato& AvXvEvs, 7 AvXvtag, i7 AvXvtTrq3, Aioy&vos etc.17 might also be seen as an emphasis of the well-known marble of the island of Paros. Rather similar to the translation of the passage in Esther is another Biblical passage describing the building of the Temple at Jerusalem by David, I Chronicles 29:2-3, where marble is said to have been used: 18 :7T2 zX ... -:!. . .;lt-!7Fnlnn . In general the Aramaic Bible has a similar version but, again, with uses of foreign intrusions, such as the plural form of mrmyr, borrowed from the Greek iaupt.apos or Latin marmor as in the Greek translation of Esther. In the Septuagint version, however (Origenes' Hexaplorum of the Septuagint, is explained as follows: Kat 17apLov (!) ed. Rahlfs), the Hebrew 21'7 t 7roAvv. In both examples, the term 'marble' (tilt, tt, marmaryn)'9 used in the Hebrew and Aramaic text for the columns of the palace is specifically characterized by the Septuagint as coming from Paros. We shall refer later to the third Biblical reference to marble, namely Song of Songs 5:15. 14 Parian marble became a synonym of brilliant and sparkling objects from the Greek Classical literature onwards. Thus, for instance Pindar's wonderful comparison in Nemeonika IV, 8183. I owe this point to Professor Helmut Kyrieleis, President of the German Institute of Archaeology, Berlin. Horace's Odes I, 19, 5 6 is a good example of literary use of Parian marble during the time of the Septuagint, namely the first century BCE: 'urit me Glycerae nitorlsplendentis Pario marmore purius'. For Paros see Dworakowska 1975, 46-56. A very useful collection of sources and history concerning Paros and its marble through history is provided by Aliprandis 1996, mainly 64-78; 150 156. Nikkos Aliprandis also offers the quotations from the Bible considered by us, but following only the later, evidently altered, translations into Greek. Thanks are due to Dr Aliprandis for making his book available to me immediately after its publication. l5 We can also note that so far none of the many modern comparative examinations of the Hebrew and Greek versions of the book of Esther has commented on the fact that Paros was used when the addition of the characterization of the marble became necessary. See Cook 1969; Moore 1993. For an interesting approach for the relationship between Jewish literature and Greek speaking audience see recently Dorival 1996; for Jewish-Greek relationships in antiquity see Feldman 1993. However at least one nineteenth century author commented on this, but his comments appear to have been missed by more recent scholars. Recently Jacobson (1997) also refers to the passage commented by us (see below, note 30). 16 Aliprandis 1996, 73. For this term see Robert 1960, 118-119, n. 7, with references to: Cyrene and Palmyra (Etudes epigraphiques et philologiques 39, n. 2: first century BCE); for literary texts see B. Pace, Parole del Passato 2 (1947), 334-337; Parinum caput used by Cicero, In Verrem IV, 28. 17 Aliprandis 1996, 63-78; Orlandos 1966, 8-10. 18 'Now I have prepared with all my might for the house of my God, all manner of precious stones, and marble stones in abundance' (The King James Version of the Bible). For another English translation see The Anchor Bible, I Chronicles (Garden City, New York, 1981, ed. J. M. Myers). 19 The word eZr.2 or ft is used in the Hebrew Bible for white limestone, which can be the equivalent of marble. See Lbw 1936; cf. Grossmark 1998. It is noteworthy for this issue that the Aramaic text uses the Aramaic form of the Greek word IA6ppapog, namely marmaryn, obviously pointing out that they are handling with marble. For Josephus' confusions about marmaron see Fischer-Stein 1994. 240 JOURNAL OF JEWISH STUDIES (2) Unlike the LXX, Josephus gives a rather simplified, even somewhat confused translation in his version of the book of Esther (AJ 11.185-295). The passage that is of interest for us here is AJ 11.187, saying: 'CK7rvoLa 7Taf.e!voST eK xPVJCOEWV Kat dpyVpEOV KLOVWV .', apparently far from both the Hebrew and LXX text.20 (3) In the Latin translation of the Bible, the Vulgate of the late fourth and early fifth century CE,2' the passage is translated as follows: ... atque purpureis ... et columnis marmoreis fulciebantur. Lectuli quoque aurei et argentei, super pavimentum zmaragdino et pario stratum lapide, dispositi erant ....22 In the Latin version, however, the columns described in the first part are said to have been just of marble without any further characterization, 23 while the stone of the pavement mentioned in continuation is described as being Parian.24 (4) The fourth source that refers to this passage occurs in the Midrashim of the Talmudic epoch that were composed from the third and fourth centuries CE onwards.25 Noteworthy is a rather ample interpretation offered in Midrash Esther Rabba 2:7,26 which is linked with the passage of I Chronicles 20 R. Marcus, ed. Loeb, note on p. 404. For Josephus' attitude towards Biblical writings see Attridge 1976; for his relation to the Book of Esther see Feldman 1970. 21 ABD 6, 860 (1992, D. C. Parker). 22 According to Biblia Sacra Latina Veteris Testamenti Hieronymo Interprete= VULGATA (Ed. Th. Heyse) (Leipzig 1873), Liber Esther, pp. 516-528, esp. I 6 (p. 516) and Biblia Sacra iuxta latinam vulgatam versione (Rome, 1951). 23 When Jerome translated the Bible into Latin he went back to the Hebrew original as he felt the Greek of the Septuagint was often inaccurate. However, he was strongly criticised for this, and thus when there were problems in reconciling the Hebrew and Greek texts, he would sometimes opt for a version which had at least some ancient authority behind it. Cf. his letter 112, 22 to Augustine defending his translation policies on the subject of the gourd in the book of Jonah: 'ergo uerbum de uerbo edisserens si "ciceion" transferre uoluissem, nullus intellegeret, si "cucurbitam" id dicerem, quod in Hebraico non habetur "hederam" posui, ut ceteris interpretibus consentirem'. Jerome's use of the epithet 'Parian' in his translation of the book of Esther, then, may well be using the authority of the Septuagint rather than reflecting his own fourth-century marble reality The fact that Virgil [Aeneid 1] used 'Parian' to describe very white glittering marble may have influenced him as well. For classical influences on the Vulgate translation see C. B. Tkacz, 'Ovid, Jerome and the Vulgate', Studia Patristica 33 (1997). I owe the remarks concerning Jerome's work to Susan Weingarten, Tel Aviv University, who is finalizing her dissertation on Jerome. An interesting parallel to the use of the term Paros for emphasizing luxury is delivered by Paulinus of Nola in his Carmina Natalicia (dated to 403-404 CE) as pointed out recently by Annewies van den Hoek (Boston) in a paper hold at the 5th ASMOSIA Conference, Boston, 1998. My thanks are going to Professor van den Hoek for discussing with me these issues and helping in improving this manuscript. 24 The embedding of pavements with patterns made from marble pieces (opus sectile) was a widespread technique all over the Mediterranean from the Hellenistic period onwards, becoming quite popular in Late Roman and Byzantine Palestine bathhouses and churches; see Fischer 1998. 25 ABD 6, 312-314 (1992, G. G. Porton); see also I. Epstein in The Midrash Rabbah (M. Freedman and M. Simon), I (London, 1977), XII-XVIII. 26 According to The Midrash Rabbah (translated into English by H. Freedman and M. Simon) (London: Soncino Press, 1980) Vol. 4. G. Stemberger (Vienna) pointed out to me that this text should be dated not earlier than 500 CE. See, however, for this source and the passage discussed here the version given by Grossmark 1998. Special thanks go to Dr Tziona Grossmark 241 '... ON PARIAN PILLARS' (THE BOOK OF ESTHER 1:6) 29:2 examined above. The Midrash says: 5:DY' (2 :U"D X'71) :n7l12'nX .nX71 ;,1Y17V MlD5l Xt7X n,n w Ix rn nn 7nii -,n nn5r.v 1n rv "n3mrl -Pb 1:x lbtn tr7mv2 1* mvv1 vr vrwnx~rrn niii i7smnX : nuiponl x X'W*l712 WII 17l JOD W% And pillars of marble. Rabbi Levi said: The quarry from which this came is not known to any human being save to this Wicked kingdom.27 An objection to this was brought from the verse, 'and all manner of precious stones, and marble stones in abundance' (I Chronicle 29:2). [This only means that] Solomon had pearls on each side and marble stones in the middle. It would have been easier for Ahasuerus to make pillars of gold and silver than to have brought pillars from Perak Onsin to Media. Here the marble of the famous palace of Shushan is explicitly said to come from a certain place called Perak Onsin, which presumably refers to Proconnesus, Perak Onsin representing a variant spelling of the Island of Proconnesus, in the Sea of Marmara.28 Compared with the sources quoted up to now, this certainly comes as a surprise. Moreover, the text reproduced here indicates the most important marble export centre of the ancient world, at least in its late antique phase. This then, reflects an accurate knowledge of contemporary reality, which is corroborated both by other sources and laboratory analysis, and moreover, it also reflects the monopoly Imperial authorities had on marble quarries. We shall now turn to the third Biblical source mentioning marble, namely Song of Songs 5:15, saying: .7'021M j7P:'D73 W'W 29 Y %WD'1n17 v n *tn,v tD -? Yn? wnr of marble in the i This symbolic use Song of Song is accurately translated from the Hebrew text by both Septuagint and Vulgate. It is, however, of some interest to consider the Rabbinic comment on Song of Songs 5:15 according to Midrash Rabbah: HIS LEGS ARE AS PILLARS OF MARBLE. HIS LEGS: he refers to the world. PILLARS OF MARBLE (SHESH): the world being established in six (shishah, for her continuous help in divulging the se&rets of Rabbinical literature. For the historical use of Rabbinical literature see mainly Safrai 1984. 27 This is an accepted rabbinical epithet for Rome, PT Berakhot 4,1 7b; Bacher 11 326, n. 2; see Grossmark 1998. The passage evidently represents an allusion to the monopoly of the Roman emperors over the marble quarries; see Fant 1989. 28 See Neubauer 1868, 396; Krauss 1898, s.v. Perkaunsin; Levy 1876, s.v. Perakonsin; for Proconessus and its archaeological value see Dworakowska 1983, 13, 26, and mainly Asgari 1978, 470-472. The issue was widely discussed by Fischer 1998 and Fischer-Grossmark 1996. 29 In translation (according to The Anchor Bible, Song of Songs, a new translation by M. H. Pope (Garden City, New York, 1977), 502 (cf. commentary p. 546): 'His legs marble pillars / Based on sockets of gold / His aspect like the Lebanon / Choice as the Cedars'. 242 JOURNAL OF JEWISH STUDIES shesh, sic!) days, as it is written, For in six days the Lord made, etc. (Ex. XXXI: 17).3° This passage represents a wonderful example of the word-plays used by the Talmudic literature on the one hand; on the other hand it reveals a problem arising from the Hebrew spelling, in this case 7W representing the word for both marble and the number six. Concluding this part, we have looked at four written sources leaning on a common document which is translated and interpreted by them. Even if the story of the original source refers to Persia, the later translations and interpretations certainly may be considered results of Near Eastern developments. As to our topic, we may ask which of the sources is the more reliable, those mentioning Paros or those mentioning Proconnesus as the source for that imaginary Persian palace, in fact the 'marble reality' of their own time? Conclusion Corroborating the three parts toward accordance between the historical evidence and the archaeological picture presented here we may conclude our topic as follows. First of all, most of the authors of the translations and interpretations of the Biblical passage from the book of Esther that mentioned 'pillars of marble' explicitly felt the need to add further explanation. This may well be due to their knowledge that marble was not available in the Near East and had to be imported from somewhere. The question is where from and why the divergent descriptions pointed out above. At the time the Septuagint was edited, and for several generations afterwards, the Cycladic island of Paros constituted one of the main sources of marble for architecture and sculpture, both for the Eastern Mediterranean and for Rome, continuing the Classical and Hellenistic tradition. Marble artifacts attributed to Ptolemaic Egypt were also made of Parian marble,3" which makes the connection between the Septuagint and Paros even more reliable. It is worth noting, however, that later revisions of the Septuagint going as late as the second and third centuries CE still remained devoted to the original concept. 30 A similar interpretative description is given by Genesis Rabbah 65, 17 while commenting Genesis 27:16 telling the story about Rebecca covering Jacob's hands with goatskins. The Midrash says 'Jacob's two arms were like two pillars from Parosofa [Diparosofa] (KDlDl8'T)'. Jacobson (1997, 214) proposes to read and translate 'Diparosofa' as 'from Paros'. If this interpretation were correct, it would mean that the tradition of Paros as the main marble source of the Mediterranean was still alive in late antiquity. I owe this reference to Susan Weingarten. 31 I owe this point to Professor John Herrmann, Director of the Greek and Roman Department of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, whom I would like to thank for his valuable remarks. John Herrmann pointed out to me that Ptolemaic portraits whose marble has been identified as 'Greek island marble' (according to M. Comstock and C. Vermeule, Sculpture in Stone: The Greek, Roman and Etruscan Collections of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston [Boston, 1976], cat. Nos. 129-130) may be considered as originating in Paros 2. The latter equation is based on Norman Herz's recent conclusions, which are to be published in the Proceedings of the Paros Conference, October 1997. ... ON PARIAN PILLARS' (THE BOOK OF ESTHER 1:6) 243 The same is valid also for the Vulgate. Since the latter was edited at the end of the fourth century CE we would expect that its author(s) were aware of the Proconnesian impact on marble supply, yet, it seems that they were rather close to the Septuagint, and therefore, here again, Parian marble still plays an important role. On the other hand, the Midrashim do not follow the footsteps of previous translators, since first of all, they are definitely not a translation but an interpretation and explanation of the Bible made by the Sages for elucidating and adapting questions to the audience of their own time. Therefore, the Talmudic sources offer an interpretation emerging from the Near Eastern reality of the Late Roman period in general and that of the Holy Land in particular. It must be clear, however, that rabbinic literature concerns itself with moral objectives while realia, marble included, are only used as explanatory tools, which should be taken cum grano salis. Nevertheless, the Sages' use of real-life descriptions allows the researcher to retrieve scraps of historical authenticity written between the lines. There can be no doubt that the authors of the sources revealed here were strongly involved with the reality of the Near East in general and the Land of Israel in particular. It seems, however, that for a part of them denominations like Parium or Proconnesium had become a kind of definition for marble per se, like modern chinaware, frigidaire, jeep etc. At the present time it looks as if both archaeology and laboratory analyses provide a consistent and clear picture of the massive use of marble from Asia Minor all over the Ancient Near East. Nevertheless, if we take into account that archaeological and laboratory examinations of marble do not exclude the use of Parian marble completely, we may now ask whether we should reconsider Paros as a more serious marble supplier of the Ancient Near East. ABBREVIATIONS AND REFERENCES ABD AJ Aliprandis 1996 Asgari 1978 The Anchor Bible Dictionary, D. N. Freedman (ed.) (New York, 1992). Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities (The Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge, Mass. 1958). Our text: AJ 11.185-295, mainly 187. N. H. Aliprandis, The Parian Marble (Athens) (New Greek). N. Asgari, 'Roman and Early Byzantine Marble Quarries of Proconnesus', in Proceedings of the Xth International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Attridge 1976 Ankara-Izmir 1973 (Ankara, 1978) 470-472. H. W Attridge, The Interpretation of Biblical History in the Antiquitates Judaicae' of Flavius Josephus (Missoula). Bacher 1896 Boardman 1980 W Bacher, Die Agada der paldstinensichen Amoraer II (repr. Hildesheim, 1965). J. Boardman, The Greeks Overseas (London). 244 Cook 1969 Dogniez 1995 Dorival-Harl-Munnich 1994 Dorival 1996 Dworakowska 1975 Dworakowska 1983 Fant 1989 Feldman 1970 Feldman 1993 Fischer 1998 Fischer-Grossmark 1996 Ghirshman 1954 Grossmark 1998 Herz-Waelkens (eds.) 1988 Jacobson 1997 Kawami 1986 Krauss 1898 Krauss 1910 Levy 1924 JOURNAL OF JEWISH STUDIES H. J. Cook, 'A Text of the Greek Versions of the Book of Esther', Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 81 (1969) 369-376. C. Dogniez, Bibliography ofthe Septuagint 1970-1993 (Leiden). G. Dorival, M. Harl and 0. Munnich, La Bible grecque des Septante. Dujudaisme au christianisme ancien (Paris). G. Dorival, 'Dire en grec les choses juives. Quelques choix lexicaux du Pentateuque de la Septante', Revue des Etudes Grecques 109 (1996) 527-547. A. Dworakowska, Quarries in Ancient Greece (Wroclaw). A. Dworakowska, Quarries in Roman Provinces (Wroclaw). J. C. Fant, Cavum Antrum Phrygiae. The Organization and Operation of the Roman Imperial Marble Quarries in Phrygia (BAR International Series 482) (Oxford). L. H. Feldman, 'Hellenization in Josephus' Version of Esther (Ant. Jud. 11, 185-295)', TAPA 101 (1970) 143-170. L. H. Feldman, Jews and Gentiles in Antiquity: Attitudes and Interactions from Alexander to Justinian (Princeton). M. L. Fischer, Marble Studies: Roman Palestine and the Marble Trade (Konstanz). M. L. Fischer and Tz. Grossmark, 'Marble Imports and Marmorarii in Eretz Israel during the Roman and Byzantine Periods', in R. Katzoff (ed.), Classical Studies in Honor ofDavid Sohlberg (Ramat Gan), 319-352. R. Ghirshman, Iran (Harmondsworth). Tz. Grossmark, 'Appendix: "Shayish" (Marble) in Rabbinic Literature', in Fischer 1998, 274-283. N. Herz and M. Waelkens (eds.), Classical Marble: Geochemistry, Technology, Trade (Dordrecht). H. Jacobson, 'Two Greek Words in Genesis Rabbah', Scripta Classica Israelica 16 (1997), 212-214. T. S. Kawami, 'Greek Art and Persian Taste: Some animal sculptures from Persepolis', AJA 90 (1986), 259-267. S. Krauss, Griechische und lateinische Lehnworter in Talmud, Midrasch und Targum (Berlin). S. Krauss, Talmudische Archilologie I (Leipzig). J. Levy, Worterbuch uber die Talmudim und Midraschim (Berlin). '... ON PARIAN PILLARS' (THE BOOK OF ESTHER 1:6) Low 1936 Martin 1965 Moore 1971 Moore 1982 Moore 1993 Neubauer 1868 Orlandos 1966 Robert 1960 Safrai 1984 245 I. Low, 'Marmor. Ein Kapitel aus meinem: Mineralien der Juden', in B. Schindler (ed.), Occident and Orient: Gaster Anniversary Volume (London, 1936) 374-379. R. Martin, Manuel d'architecture grecque I (Paris). C. A. Moore, Esther: Introduction, Translation, and Notes (The Anchor Bible) (Garden City, New York). C. A. Moore (ed.), Studies in the Book of Esther (New York). C. A. Moore, 'The Origins of the LXX Additions to the Book of Esther', Journal of Biblical Literature 92 (1993) 382-393. A. Neubauer, La Geographie du Talmud (Amsterdam). A. Orlandos, Les Materiaux de construction et la technique architecturale des anciens grecs (Paris). L. Robert, Hellenica 11-12 (Paris). S. Safrai, 'On the Problem of Using Talmudic Literature as a Source of Historical Learning', Eretz-Israel and its Scholars in the Period of the Mishnah and the Talmud (Jerusalem, 1984) 209-216 (Hebrew).