break over the weekend. ;-)
1) ...I tend to accept that theory, but were any of these figurines
made out of metal? If so, I am sure they were not meant to be broken.
This is a tough question because we don't really understand the
iconography of these figures, so it's hard to say where to draw the
line when identifying figures that are supposed to be the same
deity. There are some Syro-Hittite figures that were produced in
bronze, lead, and copper, although they are a definite minority
relative to the terracotta examples and most are male deities. I
have never seen a published metal figure that was (a) clearly
supposed to be the same bird-faced deity and (b) on the same scale
as the terracotta figures. (Plus, as I indicated in a previous post,
the evidence in support of ritualistic breakage is pretty slim in
the first place.)
2) Are the merhgarh female idols related to the syro hittite idols
in that they represent the same fertility goddess (Astarte or
Asherah etc.)?
Bird and female imagery are common to the artwork from many cultures
that had absolutely no contact with each other. Female imagery
obviously has common fertility meaning, and birds are common symbols
of transcendence, spirits of the dead, communication with the gods,
etc. due to their ability to fly. (For example, think of Ba-birds in
Egyptian symbolism.) There is definitely evidence of trade between
the Near East and the Indus cultures, but no evidence that either
region had a sizable impact on the religious beliefs/practices of
the other. It's also noteworthy that there are major stylistic
differences between the two broad types of figures, which further
suggests two independent streams of development.
3) Many of the Tel Halaf idols I have seen also have a bird
face - can they also be placed in the same category? Do the
artifacts from Tel Halaf suggest that they were ritually broken?
Well, to be blunt, most Tel Halaf female idols you have seen for
sale are probably fake. That said, authentic examples have a
pinched, schematic face that generally isn't interpreted to be bird-
like on purpose. The emphasis for these figures is exclusively on
the fertility component -- breasts, hips, and thighs get all the
attention. The faces, lower legs, and arms are simplistic because
that's not the aspect of the female figure that the artist was
really concerned about! Certainly no evidence for ritual breakage
for these figures, and I don't know of any authors who have made an
argument for it.
4) I have seen some Tanit figurines for sale recently - they do not
seem to have been ritually broken. I realize they are Phoenician,
but it seems possible that ritually breaking idols was somewhat of a
common practice in ancient times - to release the 'mana' or powers
locked within the idol.
Definitely not the case for Tanit figures. These were frequently
mold-produced and hollow. The fact that you see few broken &
repaired examples for sale speaks more to the observation that a
broken hollow figure is usually broken beyond the point of easy
repair/restoration than to differences in ancient use.
5) Is it probable that the Tel Brak 'eye idols' were
also ritually broken? I have noticed that many of the stone idols
have been broken at the neck (if terracotta - one of the 'eyes' are
usually broken). Could the breaks be due to structural weakness -
the long body of the 'Astartes' and the thin necks of the 'eye
idols'?
Eye idols found in context are not deliberately broken. They are
found in groups around a central figure and serve only to symbolize
the reverence and absolute attention given by the observers. Like
the fertility figures, only the salient aspects of the watcher --
his or her eyes -- are emphasized. Consequently, the breaks on eye
idols are entirely accidental. I believe the same is true for all of
the types of figures that you described above. All of them have
fragile points, like waists or outstretched arms, that are easily
broken.
Jason
http://www.janusantiquities.com
--- In Ancientartifacts@yahoogroups.com, S M <scriptusmeus@...>
wrote:
>
> Thanks to all for the help and guidance you provide.
>
> Rolf, I was aware that many people believe that the syro
hittite female fertility figures (astarte?) were ritually broken. I
tend to accept that theory, but were any of these figurines made out
of metal? If so, I am sure they were not meant to be broken.
>
> Did they also ritually break the horsemen? Is the figure on the
horse a male god (possibly baal - or his equivalent?).
>
> Are the merhgarh female idols related to the syro hittite
idols in that they represent the same fertility goddess (Astarte or
Asherah etc.)
>
> Many of the Tel Halaf idols I have seen also have a bird
face - can they also be placed in the same category? Do the
artifacts from Tel Halaf suggest that they were ritually broken?
>
> I have seen some Tanit figurines for sale recently - they do not
seem to have been ritually broken. I realize they are Phoenician,
but it seems possible that ritually breaking idols was somewhat of a
common practice in ancient times - to release the 'mana' or powers
locked within the idol.
>
> Is it probable that the Tel Brak 'eye idols' were
also ritually broken? I have noticed that many of the stone idols
have been broken at the neck (if terracotta - one of the 'eyes' are
usually broken). Could the breaks be due to structural weakness -
the long body of the 'Astartes' and the thin necks of the 'eye
idols'?
>
>
> Tony
>
>
>
>
> --- On Thu, 6/5/08, rolf5568 heliosgallery@... wrote:
>
> From: rolf5568 heliosgallery@...
> Subject: [Ancientartifacts] Re: dougie9350 - questionable syro
hittite horse
> To: Ancientartifacts@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Thursday, June 5, 2008, 12:57 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Tony,
>
> Genuine Syro-Hittite votive figures which are intact can probably
be
> counted on one hand: these figures were made to be ritually broken
> and distributed as offerings in fields for fertility or under
> building foundations - the likelihood of one appearing on ebay and
> not being fiercely bid upon by dealers such as myself is
improbable
> though of course not impossible. The reason I wouldn't personally
bid
> on this example is that I know there are many fakes of this type
in
> circulation and that the appearance of the surface is consistent
with
> the fakes which I've seen and handled in person.
>
> Newsflash: genuine items on ebay! I noticed a sale via fleabay-
live
> which seems to be offering genuine antiquities - Estates Unlimited
> Inc. - I only looked at the Classical pieces but they looked
pretty
> good and many appear (I think) to have come from Howie Nowes who's
a
> perfectly straight and proper dealer in my opinion.
>
> Cheers,
> Rolf Kiaer
> www.heliosgallery. com
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ancientartifacts/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ancientartifacts/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:Ancientartifacts-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:Ancientartifacts-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Ancientartifacts-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
