I first became aware of the
Neolithic stone face masks from Palestinian occupied territories by reading a
National Geographic article by Kristin Romey (2018) about the 16th
mask found. The sheer beauty, and the artistic intent which it displays
captivated me. As I delved deeper into subject, I found that there were more.
Approximately 16 in fact. Additionally, their ‘otherness’ and varied expressions,
imparting disparate emotions to the viewer, such as fear, shock and
occasionally joy or laughter, drew me in and elicited in me a host of questions:
“What did the artisans that made them mean to convey?” “What use were they put
to and what in context?” and “Did they have some religious or ritual meaning?”
You might, therefore, think that I
am about to embark on a story of entralling archaeological excavations carried
out under the scorching middle-eastern sun, by underpaid labourers or
university undergraduate students and their archaeologist supervisors, but
you’d be wrong. The truth is far darker and much more unsettling than that.
To frame the story in a
scientific framework, I’ll begin my story with those masks whose origin and
context is certain.
This is one of the 16 oldest masks ever made by man:
Nahal Hemar Cave Stone Mask, excavated in 1988 in the occupied west
bank of Palestine by archaeologists of the occupying state. Image credit: adapted
from Borrell et al. (2020). Original
caption reads:
Fig. 3. Some of the outstanding objects found in Nahal Hemar Cave: A)
stone mask.. [Photo A: Elie Posner].
Nahal Hemar Cave is a small chamber of about 4 ×
8m, with a narrow entrance on the west bank of the eponymous dry gorge in the
Judean Desert. It lies about 11km south of the town of Arad and at about 210m
altitude. The cave, after being discovered by locals and partially looted, was
excavated in 1983 by Bar-Yosef and Alon (1988), revealing one of the richest,
Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) assemblages ever found in Palestine and the
Levant more widely.
Nehal Hemal Cave with the spoil from the 1983, excavations clearly
seen below the entrance. Image credit: Borrell et al. (2020).
The mask, and the partial remnant of a second were dated by 14C
dates, Bar-Yosef and Alon (1988) between 7900 and 7100 cal. BC, which puts it
in the Middle/Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic for the region. The mask is therefore
one of the earliest face-masks ever found from any site worldwide. As such, it,
along with the 15 others found in the area, is of tremendous significance for
humanity. At nearly 10,000 years old it, in my opinion rates as one of the
greatest pieces of portable art from the period in question. It is now housed
in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem.
In addition to the stone masks a myriad of unique and precious objects
was also found: modelled skulls [that is skulls plastered in asphalt], remains
of an anthropoid statue, bone figurines, well-preserved organic remains such as
mats, wooden beads, basketry, knotted netting and twined fragments of linen.
Flint tools, as well as numerous blades of a type unique to the cave: the ‘Nahal
Hemar knife’ [large and pointed blades with two proximal opposed notches], a complete
sickle, made from bone with flint inserts, beads of stone and plaster and
seashells from the Red Sea and the Mediterranean.
‘Modelled’ skull from Nahal Hemar. The material used to cover the
detached human skulls was asphalt. The bodies to which the three skulls
recovered belonged, were also buried in the cave. Image credit: Yakar and
Hershkovitz (1988).
Nahal Hemar ‘knives’. These stone tools, unique to the cave were often
found broken and/or burnt, what their purpose is unclear, but ritual usage
seems to be a strong possibility, considering the makeup of the assemblage
overall.
The mask of second-most note is that from Horvat
Duma.
The Dayan Mask, ploughed up near Horvat Duma and subsequently sold to
the then, eponymous Israeli defence minister. Image credit: Israel Museum.
It’s history is documented by Hershman (2014): “Our intriguing story
of the most ancient masks in the world opens with the stone mask, [discovered and] purchased in 1970 by
Moshe Dayan (who was Israel’s Minister of Defense at the time) in Kefar Idna,
near Hebron. Shortly thereafter “the Dayan Mask,” as it is called, was exhibited
at the Israel Museum. Following Dayan’s death in 1981, Laurence and Wilma
Tisch, New York, acquired the Dayan collection of antiquities and donated it to
the Israel Museum. Since then the mask has been part of the Israel Museum Collection
and is one of the universal treasures displayed in the Museum’s permanent
exhibition of prehistoric cultures.
This mask is officially known as the “Mask from Horvat Duma,” named
after the place it was found, which is next to Hebron. However, based on
evidence that reached us it appears that the mask was actually unearthed by a
farmhand who had been ploughing a field north of Horvat Duma, on the outskirts
of the village of el-Hadeb. In his book Living with the Bible, Dayan writes: “I
was fortunate to acquire a ritual article from this region, a magnificent mask
... The marvel, apart from its age, lies in its facial expression. It has circles
for eyes, a small nose, and prominent grinning teeth. It is a human face, but
one that strikes terror in its beholder. If there is any power in the world
able to banish evil spirits, it must assuredly dwell in this mask … Before
handing it to experts at the government department of antiquities for their
study and confirmation of the dating, I was anxious to inspect the site where
it was found … I examined the ploughed soil and spotted bits of bone and
fragments of stone vessels between the clods of earth in the furrows.”
Following in Dayan’s footsteps, a local antiquities inspector from
Hebron, archaeologist Jibril Srur, set out for el-Hadeb. In the trial
excavations he conducted there, flint and stone tools, bones, lumps of ochre,
and the remains of early structures that had been damaged by the tractor came
to light. The site’s area was estimated at around 2.5 acres. All these finds
attest to the fact that in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Period, some 9,000 years
ago, a large village existed at this site.”
It is interesting to note that, like the masks from Nahal Hemar, the Horvat
Duma example also comes from the occupied West Bank. All sites and museums in
the occupied lands fell into the hands of the Israelis after the Six Days War.
To understand the scope and completeness of the cultural appropriation that
took place, it is worth taking a look at an academic study of the record of
Israeli archaeologists post 1967.
Excepts, from Greenberg and Keinan (2009): “The six-day war of June
1967 marked the beginning of a process that was to revolutionize the
archaeological investigation of the central highland regions, leading to the
addition of thousands of sites to its inventory, hundreds to the list of its
excavated places, and changing some of the central paradigms of archaeological
interpretation of its history.
..In Israel, the fields of archaeology and historical geography had
long been linked, and academics in both fields had an intimate and mutual
relationship with military historians and with the Israeli Defence Force (IDF)
itself. In 1956-7, during the brief conquest of the Sinai peninsula, limited
surveys and excavations were carried out with IDF assistance by the pioneer of
the archaeological survey in Israel, Yohanan Aharoni, this was to be a model
for future work in Israel’s battlegrounds. In 1967, archaeologists entered the Palestine
Archaeological Museum almost in tandem with the troops.
Immediately after the war, on the 15th of June 1967, the
Archaeological Council was convened: at the top of its agenda were the
protection of sites in the newly occupied areas and the fate of the Museum,
which had recently been nationalized by Jordan shortly after the occupation of
the West Bank in 1967, the “Emergency Survey” of the West Bank, and the Golan (so called, in view of the
impending return, as it was thought, of the occupied territories to Jordan and
Syria) was put into motion. Within a few months the surveyors were able to
submit a preliminary report, presented at a meeting in the residence of the
President of Israel: This survey focused on sites already identified on maps or
in the Mandatory Schedule of Sites as possible antiquities sites..
It was to be followed by a long line of surveys, many of which emerged
from the crucible of Israeli survey methodology at Tel Aviv University.
These surveys, which dramatically transformed our knowledge of the archaeological
resources of the West Bank, were initiated in 1978, after it became clear that
Israeli presence in the West Bank was not a passing phase, this realization
corresponded with political changes in Israel and the invigoration of the
settlement policy in the West Bank. The surveys have recorded, to date, a total
of approximately 6000 sites—a 600% increase in relation to the number of sites
recorded in 1967…
Gradually, Israeli academics began to initiate research-oriented
excavations, often merging with survey work. This trend reached its apex during
the second decade of occupation, from 1978-1987, when funding for work in the
West Bank became available due to the promotion of Jewish settlement activity
by the Israel government.”
Whilst the situation has been somewhat ameliorated between the
Israelis and the Palestinians, since the 1993 Oslo accords, actual involvement
of the Palestinians has been limited due to the chronic lack of funding imposed
by the economic conditions brought about by the Israeli occupation.
Greenberg and Keinan (2009) again: “The signing of the Oslo accords in
1993 introduced a new phase of activity: Because the Oslo accords, as
negotiated in bilateral interim agreements, called for “[the transfer of]
powers and responsibilities in the sphere of archaeology in the West Bank and
the Gaza Strip… from the military government and its Civil Administration to
the Palestinian side.. a sense of
urgency arose regarding areas scheduled for withdrawal. The most visible of these
pre-implementation activities was “Operation Scroll”, a Staff Officer for
Archaeology SOA-IAA (Israel Antiquities Authority) collaborative effort
conducted in late 1993-early 1994 in order to pre-empt possible looting
(according to the initiators) or retrieval by Palestinian archaeologists
(according to critics) of epigraphic material from Judean Desert caves in the
area of Jericho and the northern Dead Sea shore.
After implementation, when parts of the West Bank were transferred to
the authority of the Palestinian National Authority and its Department of
Antiquities (the PDA), pressure on the archaeological sites within areas still
controlled by the SOA did not abate. This was caused, on the one hand, by the
closure policy that led to increasing economic hardship in the West Bank and
the concomitant rise of subsistence
looting. On the other hand, the construction of the Separation Barrier in
the first decade of the new millennium threw dozens of archaeological sites in the
way of destructive development, necessitating dozens of new salvage
excavations. In April 2008, at the 34th Archaeological Congress in Jerusalem,
the SOA characterized the members of his unit as the “last archaeologists” in
the West Bank, signifying that — in his perception — few antiquities of significance
would survive the disorder that would reign after the dissolution of the unit
(presumably, in the event of Israeli withdrawal and the establishment of a Palestinian
state), and that there was no significant Palestinian professional infrastructure
that could take over the SOA’s responsibilities.
…the SOA has remained very active in the last decade of recorded work,
carrying out more than 270 excavations at 190 sites. The total number of SOA licenses
for excavation and survey issued between 1967 and 2007 was 1148, of which at
least 820 were carried out by the unit.
A few words may be in order regarding archaeology in the Palestinian
National Authority, although work carried out by its Department of Antiquities is
outside the purview of this report. In a review of the emergence of a Palestinian
school of archaeology, Ziadeh-Seely (2007) describes the ideological and institutional
background to the creation (and
subsequent temporary demise) of the Institute of Archaeology at Birzeit
University, emphasizing the attempt to create a multi-cultural approach to the
past.
Al-Houdalieh (2009) has recently complemented this description with a
thorough assessment of the present state of archaeological studies in the
occupied West Bank. These publications establish the existence of an
independent Palestinian approach to archaeology, initiated in the late 1970s
and surviving, if not thriving, at the present.”
It is therefore clear, that the Israeli’s have systematically sought
to find, recover and remove to Jerusalem every antiquity they could discover.
Not only that, by their policy of closure, of the West Bank in particular, they
have deliberately made the Palestinians economically destitute thus fostering
the subsistence looting highlighted above. Worse still, the narrative of whose
ancestors were responsible for the creation of some of the greatest art of the
Neolithic has been substantially re-written in favour of a group who are
largely immigrants – the Israelis.
Of the 16 masks known to exist, three are in the possession of the
Israeli state, one in a private collection within Israel (Tel Aviv), one in the
offices of the Palestine Exploration Fund in London, one in the Musée Bible et
Terre Sainte, Paris, one (partial) mask in a Jordanian museum. The remaining 8 have been sold illicitly and
are housed in a family home of Michael and Judy Steinhardt, in upstate New
York.
Michael H Steinhardt is an interesting character with a chequered
career in hedge fund management, and a
somewhat sordid, family background. Son of Sol Frank Steinhardt, also known as
"Red McGee", allegedly New York’s leading jewellery fence. Whether he
ever reached so high in the criminal fraternity, is a moot point. Whatever the
true story, it is a fact that Red
Steinhardt was convicted in 1958 on two counts of buying and selling stolen
jewellery, and was sentenced to serve two 5-to-10 year terms, to run
consecutively.
In a Forbes’ (2001) article, much more detail was revealed about the
elder Steinhardt: “Sol was a compulsive high-stakes gambler and colourful New
York nightclub patron. He was also New York's leading jewel fence, a convicted
felon and pal to underworld figures such as Meyer Lansky and
"Three Finger" Jimmy Aiello. The night before crime figure Joey Anastasia
was rubbed out in the Park Sheraton barbershop in 1957, he and Sol were out on
the town gambling together.
The next year, Sol was convicted on charges of buying and selling
stolen jewelry and was sentenced to five to ten years in prison on each of two
felony counts.
Michael Steinhardt visited his father in prison, but saw it as an
obligation, since Sol had paid for Steinhardt's education at the University of
Pennsylvania's Wharton School – most likely with ill-gotten gains, Michael Steinhardt
suggests, in his autobiography, No Bull: My Life In and Out of Markets.
He also notes that when he was starting out on Wall Street, he was
lucky no one identified him as the son of a convict serving time at Sing Sing
and Dannemora, a maximum-security prison in upstate New York. Otherwise, such
white-shoe firms as Calvin Bullock, a mutual fund group, and Loeb
Rhoades, the brokerage firm that was a precursor to Merrill Lynch, would
not have hired him. In addition to an education, Sol gave his son envelopes
stuffed with $10,000 in $100 bills to put in the stock market. This helped
Steinhardt build his net worth to $200,000 at a young age. In effect, his
father was Steinhardt's first investment client.
Recent history, also
reveals similarities between the two men. Like father, like son, Michael Steinhardt
has also, had his own run in with the law. He and his firm were investigated,
with Salomon Bros. and the Caxton Group, for allegedly attempting to corner the
market for short-term Treasury notes in the early 1990s. In his autobiography he states "When
you're a target of the government investigation, it is very unpleasant,"
he says. He personally paid 75% of the $70 million in civil fines that were
part of settling the case with the Securities and Exchange Commission and
Justice Department – a mere fraction of the $600 million his hedge fund made on
the Treasury positions.
What did Michael Steinhardt, do with his dubiously acquired fortune?
Well he bought antiquities. Many hundreds by all accounts. In the course of
writing this blog post it has come to light that he now owns almost ALL the
known masks found by “subsistence looting”!
His collection of these Palestinian Neolithic masks now numbers 8.
Before we move on to those, several other masks discovered in the same period
as that from Horvat Duma are worthy of note. The mask now on display in the Musée
Bible et Terre Sainte, Paris, has an interesting history. Hershman (2014),
details its discovery:
“Józef Milik, a Catholic priest of Polish origin and a biblical
scholar, who was nicknamed “The Prodigious Priest,” was considered the
brightest member of the École biblique et archéologique française de Jérusalem
team working on the deciphering of the Dead Sea Scrolls. His single
contribution to the prehistory of the Land of Israel is less well known, and it
is doubtful that even he himself was aware of its importance.
During a field trip he took in the early 1960s, he purchased from
Bedouin near Hebron in the southern Judean Hills a stone mask as well as
several pottery vessels dating from the Middle Bronze Age, 3,600 years old.
Since the mask was sold together with the pottery, he assumed that it also
dated from the Middle Bronze Age and, consequently, that belonged to the
Canaanite culture. He gave the mask to the Catholic French research
organization, Bible et Terre Sainte, which was holding an exhibition in Paris
at the time on the material culture of the Bible. Owing to its artistic
qualities the mask became the star of the show. And indeed, in the publication
that accompanied the exhibition we read: “The most important work in the group,
which is unparalleled in any of the Palestinian collections, is the limestone
mask, whose power of expression arouses spectators’ admiration.”
The first description of the mask, which documents its details while
extolling the ancient stone carving, is still the most beautiful and
comprehensive portrayal of its special characteristics. “The mask is of a rare
perfection: An oval, youthful face, a broad forehead with prominent cheekbones
pointed at a straight, short nose. Round spaces take the place of eyes, and the
mouth is wide open as if to express deep, eternal astonishment. Above the eyes
traces of black paint are visible, which the artist used to indicate eyebrows,
since he could not carve them into the stone. The same makeup can be found on
the upper lip and the chin. Finally, six holes on each side and two in the
upper part (one is unfinished) were meant for suspending the mask. Nothing in
the art of that period exhibits the artistic proficiency that this artist attained in stone. Even though it was believed at that time that the
mask dated from the Bronze Age – a period thousands of years later than when
the mask was actually, made – it was defined as a breathtaking artistic
achievement.
Interestingly, Milik was indeed hard pressed to find parallels to the
mask within the Canaanite material culture, and he noticed the differences
between this mask and other masks from the Bronze Age, such as the clay mask
from Hazor. At the same time he managed to recognize the similarities between
the mask and the face of a Neolithic plaster statue head found in ancient
Jericho. Nonetheless, he rejected this observation owing to his impression that
the statue, with its eyes inlaid with shells, might represent a living person,
whereas the stone mask, he believed, was used in funerary cults. In his
opinion, its small size (18 x 14 cm) suggested that it did not cover the face
of the deceased but was rather attached to a pole and fulfilled a ceremonial
role.
The mask, along with the rest of the collection that Milik gave to the
organization Bible et Terre Sainte, moved to a small museum by that name that
opened in Paris under the auspices of Université Catholique de Paris. It
quickly became the most famous exhibit in its Biblical and Second Temple Period
collections, as it remains until today.
The French archaeologist Jean Perrot, who was
well-acquainted with the artistic and cultic finds of the earlier periods in
the Levant, determined that the mask was not Middle Bronze, but actually
belonged to the Neolithic Period. In his book, Syria-Palestine, he noted the
similarity between this mask, the Mask from Horvat Duma (discovered a year
after the opening of the museum in Paris), and the modelled skulls from Tell
Ramad in Syria and ancient Jericho, and he proposed that all these were
portraits of the dead.”
The mask from the Musée Bible et Terre Sainte, Paris. Photo credit
Hershman (2014). Original caption reads: Mask from the Musée Bible et Terre
Sainte | Unknown site, probably in the Judean Desert Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
Period, 9,000 years ago (?) | Limestone | 18 x 14 cm | Ca. 1 kg |.
The circumstances of the discovery of mask from er Ram north of
Jerusalem, now in the possession of the Palestinian Exploration Fund, London
are also described by Hershman (2014): “The purchaser of the mask, Dr. Thomas
Chaplin, a physician for the “London Society for Promoting Christianity Amongst
the Jews,” who directed the mission’s hospital in Jerusalem’s Old City in the
nineteenth century, was also a collector of antiquities. In 1881 one of the
women of the village of er-Ram northeast of Jerusalem sold him a stone mask. In
the article that appeared almost ten years later in the Palestine Exploration
Fund Quarterly Statement,54 he wrote that after he purchased the strange
ancient mask from the woman, the villagers, armed with rifles, chased him,
demanding that he return it, since they regarded it as a kind of amulet.”
The mask from er Ram, from Hershman (2014). OIriginal
caption reads: “Mask from er-Ram | Er-Ram, northeast of Jerusalem | Possibly
Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Period, 9,000 years ago. Chalk rich in iron mineral
veins | Ca. 20 x 18 cm | 1.8 kg |. Stylistically different from the other mask,
with features recalling a living human face instead of skulls, this mask may
represent a different tradition of mask-making or an unfinished mask.
Mask in the collection of Oded
Golan, Tel Aviv. This mask has an unknown provenance, but is very close in
terms of material and style to the other masks of this group. Thus assumed to
be ca. 9000+ years old, and made in the Neolithic, and obtained by illicit sale
of materials from subsistence looting.
The Oded Golan mask. Picture credit, Hershman (2014),
original caption reads: “Mask from a Private Collection in Israel | Provenance
unknown | Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Period, 9,000 years ago Limestone |
Dimensions unknown | Collection of Oded Golan, Tel Aviv.
Returning now to the remainder of the known masks, all in
the possession of Michael Steinhardt, they are as follows:
The “Watching Mask”.
The Oded Golan mask. Picture credit, Hershman (2014),
original caption reads: “Mask from a Private Collection in Israel | Provenance
unknown | Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Period, 9,000 years ago Limestone |
Dimensions unknown | Collection of Oded Golan, Tel Aviv.
Returning now to the remainder of the known masks, all in
the possession of Michael Steinhardt, they are as follows:
The “Watching Mask”.
A
slightly threatening mask with unsettling eyes. Hershman (2014). Original
caption reads: “Watching Mask | Unknown site, southern Judean Hills |
Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Period, 9,000 years ago. Chalk | 20 x 16 cm | 1.8 kg |
Collection of Judy and Michael Steinhardt, New York.The Large Mask
The Large mask with its almost
expressionless face, seems to say “the only thing the dead know is that it is
better to be alive”. Picture credit, Hershman (2014). Original caption reads: “Large
Mask | Unknown site, southern Judean Hills. Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Period,
9,000 years ago. Chalk | 29.5 cm x 16 cm | 2.2 kg | Collection of Judy and
Michael Steinhardt, New York.
Debby Hershman holds up the Large Mask in her laboratory, during the
preparation for the exhibition of the masks. In interview Zion (2014) for the
Times of Israel, she hazarded that “The people who created this artwork were
among the first humans to abandon nomadic life and establish permanent
settlements. Because the masks predate writing by at least 3,500 years, there
is no record of their usage. Based on years of attribute analysis of their
iconography, however, Hershman believes that the carved limestone masks were
used as part of an ancestor cult, and that shamans or tribal chiefs wore the
masks during a ritual masquerade honoring the deceased.”
Image credit: Zion (2014). Original caption
reads: “Dr. Debby Hershman, curator of prehistoric culture at the Israel Museum,
holds up a neolithic mask in the museum’s laboratories.”
The Expressive Mask
To
me the Expressive Mask shows a laughing face. If these masks are meant to show
the face of the deceased, then perhaps the person had a happy life and was one
of those people that met each day with a smile? It makes me wonder whether the
masks were made for individuals and if so did sculptor(s) attempt to embody
some aspect of the deceased personality in the mask they carved? Picture credit
Hershman (2014. Original caption reads: “Expressive Mask | Unknown site,
southern Judean Hills | Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Period, 9,000 years ago. Finely
crystalline limestone | 16.5 x 12 cm | 0.7 kg | Collection of Judy and Michael
Steinhardt, New YorkThe Solid Mask
The
Solid Mask recalls that from er Ram above. Whether, it too, represents a
different, artistic tradition, is unknown. Picture credit Hershman (2014).
Original caption reads: “Solid Mask | Unknown site, southern Judean Hills |
Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Period, 9,000 years ago | Finely crystalline limestone
| 21.8 x 13.2 cm | 2.9 kg | Collection of Judy and Michael Steinhardt, New York.”The
Miniature Mask
Another smiling mask, but this time of very small size. Once again,
the mask triggers a cascade of thoughts and emotions. I wonder, does the face
relate to an actual person? Considering its size and expression, perhaps it was
a baby or small child? But with the context unknown and probably destroyed by
the looters, I guess we’ll never know. It is so frustrating that people like
the Steinhardts are willing to pay for these objects and thus be complicit in
the destruction of irreplaceable Neolithic sites.
Were these unprovenanced masks found in a ritual setting like Nahal
Hemar? If so what were the relationships between this mask and the other
objects which, may have been found? Once again, the answer is we’ll never know.
Picture credit Hershman (2014). Original caption
reads: “Miniature Mask | Unknown site, southern Judean Hills | Pre-Pottery
Neolithic B Period, 9,000 years ago.”
The
Chief’s Mask
Two views of the Chief’s Mask. The expression, like that of the Large
Mask is rather bleak. Again, I wonder, what was the sculptor trying to convey?
Additionally, the execution seems somewhat primitive. Is it older than some of
the others? Also and the surface patina seems smooth: was it regularly handled
as some sort of religious/cultic object?
Upper image credit Elie Posner, Israel Museum. This is in high
resolution and it is worth opening and zooming in to see the polished
toolmarks.
Lower image Hershman (2014). Original caption reads: “Chief’s Mask |
Unknown site, Judean Hills or southern Judean Foothills | Pre-Pottery Neolithic
B Period, 9,000 years ago Chalk | 19.5 x 15 cm | 1.3 kg | Collection of Judy
and Michael Steinhardt, New York.”
The Wondering Mask
To me this masks looks more primitive in execution, than some of the
others and seems very similar to the Chief’s Mask in material and the patina especially
on the lower part of the face. Considering two masks were found at Nahal Hemar
Cave, is it possible that these two masks came from the same site? Again, as
the owner was unwilling to explain the circumstances of the mask’s acquisition,
we will probably, never know.
Picture credit: Hershman (2014).
Original caption reads: “Wondering Mask | Unknown site, Judean Hills or
southern Judean Foothills | Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Period 9,000 years ago |
Dolomitic limestone | 21 x 13.5 cm | 1.6 kg | Collection of Judy and Michael
Steinhardt, New York.”
The Grinning Mask
A
third, rather primitive mask, but this time with a more pronounced expression.
Grinning? Yes, I’d go with that. Patina and ‘gut feeling’ put it close to the
last two stylistically and in terms of the base material from which it appears
to be made. Picture credit, Hershman (2014). Original caption reads: “Grinning
Mask | Unknown site, Judean Hills or southern Judean Foothills | Pre-Pottery
Neolithic B Period. 9,000 years ago | Chalk | 22.6 x 16 cm | 1.6 kg |
Collection of Judy and Michael Steinhardt, New York.”
The 16th Stone Mask
I’ll let Romey (2018), take up the story as she seems to have got the best
interview out of the team involved in the mask’s recovery:
“The stone mask was recovered several months ago by the authority’s
Theft Prevention Unit. A subsequent investigation led archaeologists back to
the “probable archaeological site in which the mask was originally found,” near
the settlement of Pnei Hever in the southern West Bank. The results of an
initial analysis of the mask were presented earlier this week at the annual
meeting of the Israel Prehistoric Society by Ronit Lupu, of the IAA’s
Antiquities Theft Prevention Unit, and Omry Barzilai, head of the IAA’s
Archaeological Research Department.
The newly discovered mask shares many characteristics of the others
found to date. These include a human-size face of soft, carved limestone with
large openings for eyes, a defined mouth, and holes drilled around its
circumference. The holes lead some researchers to suggest that the masks were
designed to be tied to a face or an object.
“It’s amazing, it’s beautiful,” says Lupu, who was involved with the
recovery of the mask and the identification of the site associated with its
discovery. “You see it and you want to cry from happiness.”
Along with their aesthetic appeal, the Neolithic stone masks are
scientifically important, created at a moment in history when people in the
region began to organise in settled communities, according to Barzilai, who has
analysed the find.
In this latest case, the unnamed person who discovered the mask led
Lupu to the find site. Conflicting accounts make it unclear whether the
artefact was voluntarily handed over to the Theft Prevention Unit or tracked
down. A surface survey of the site revealed flint tools dated to between 7,500
and 6,000 B.C., Lupu says. A preliminary isotopic and mineralogical analysis of
the mask shows that it came from that area.
Based on the hazy origins of the majority of the masks, Lupu
understands questions about authenticity. But she’s confident that the new mask
hails from the discovery site.
“I’m sure that this is the context for this
find,” she says. “I think when we publish the [final analysis of the mask], it
will be a done deal.”
Ronit Lupi in a variety of poses with the 16th
mask, stolen from Palestinian lands by the Israelis. Picture credit: Anon (2018).
Original caption reads: “Archaeologist Ronit Lupu told AFP it was an
"amazing find".
Thoughts on
the ‘recovery’ of the mask, from the Palestinian side paint a very different
picture. A feature piece in Middle East Eye by Vidal (2021), is scathing of how
the Israeli government continue to misappropriate items of Palestinian
heritage: “In 2014, the two masks owned by the Israel Museum were exhibited
together in Jerusalem with other masks from Michael Steinhardt’s private
collections for the first time.
“This is a
family reunion of the oldest surviving portraits of ancient man,” Debby
Hershman, the Israel Museum curator who organised the exhibition and conducted
research on the masks for a decade told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. “We are
bringing them back home,” she added.
But it wasn’t exactly “home”. Although the Israel Museum was
built in the early 1960s on the lands of the Palestinian village of Sheikh Badr
and was designed to resemble an Arab village on the hill over Jerusalem, most
Palestinians are not allowed to visit it.
The majority
of the residents of the areas where most of the masks were found and taken from
- Palestinian towns and villages such as al-Ram, al-Hadeb, and the Hebron Hills
- were unable to see the masks the only time they were on public display
because of the restrictions placed on Palestinians entering Jerusalem.
The artists Basel Abbas and Ruanne Abou-Rahme were among those who
weren’t able to easily access the exhibition. In 2014, they came across the
Neolithic masks online while doing research for their work.
“We always had a fascination with masks and with anonymity, with being
anonymous as a political act,” says Basel Abbas. When they googled “masks +
Palestine”, they were expecting to find images of Palestinians wearing ski
masks at protests, but photos of the ancient masks exhibited at the Israel
Museum also showed up in the results.
“We were interested in how the museum was narrating these masks,”
Abbas tells MEE. The exhibition referred to them as “our masks” from “the
ancient Land of Israel”. In the exhibition’s catalogue, the borders of the West
Bank are erased and only terms like “Judean Hills” and “Judean desert” are
used, rendering Palestinians invisible.
“These masks don’t just pre-date Palestine and Israel, they pre-date
all religions. So for a single entity to try to claim this as part of their
national narrative is just taking mythology to a whole new level,” says Abbas..
In 2018, an Israeli settler found a mask [the 16th mask under discussion here] believed to be from
the same period in the southwest of Hebron, in the occupied West Bank. Even
though it’s against international law to remove cultural property from occupied
territories, the mask was taken by Israel’s Antiquities Authority.
"We have documented only what Israel confiscated following the
occupation of the West Bank in 1967," says Muhannad Sayel, director of the
national registry at the Palestinian Ministry of Antiquities. "We have
documented 20,311 artefacts [...] We are seeking to present a file to the
International Criminal Court on this issue to demand the restoration of
antiquities seized by Israel, and we are now at the stage of preparing this
file."
MEE reached out to the Israel Antiquities Authority for comment but
had not received one at time of publication.
The Israeli government maintains it is within its right to oversee
archaeology in the areas it controls in the West Bank. The military has its own
archaeological unit, which claims it is its responsibility to oversee
excavations and “protect” archaeological sites from illegal digging and the
smuggling of artefacts.
“The looting of Africa, the
Middle East and Asia by Europe is ongoing, and this is part of that framework,
a continuation of that mindset,” says Abbas. “Looting, whether it’s for
material wealth and natural resources, or history and ownership over narratives,
[is] an extension of what’s happening in Palestine today.”
I think those sentiments
summarise the actions of the Israeli Government pretty accurately. I could add
more, but the words of Palestinians, and how they feel about the theft of their
cultural and material heritage, in the form of these Neolithic Masks is far
more authentic than anything I could write. Enough said.
References
Anon (2018). Israel unveils 9,000-year-old mask from the
West Bank. BBC News online at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-46376993
Borrell, F., Ibáñez, J.J. and Bar-Yosef, O., (2020). Cult
paraphernalia or everyday items? Assessing the status and use of the flint
artefacts from Nahal Hemar Cave (Middle PPNB, Judean Desert). Quaternary
International, 569, pp.150-167.
Gannon, M. (2014). World's Oldest Masks Show Creepy Human
Resemblance. At: https://www.livescience.com/44078-stone-age-masks-israel-museum.html
accessed 10.09.2021
Greenberg, R. and Keinan, A., 2009. Israeli archaeological
activity in the West Bank 1967-2007: A sourcebook. Jerusalem: Ostracon
Griffiths, S. (2014). The world's oldest masks: 9,000-year-old
stone 'portraits of the dead' go on show in Jerusalem. Daily Mail online at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2573852/The-worlds-oldest-masks-9-000-year-old-stone-portraits-dead-Jerusalem.html
Hershman, D. (2014) Face to Face: The Oldest Masks in the
World. Catalogue for the exhibition. The Israel Museum, Jerusalem.
March–September 2014. Online at: https://museum.imj.org.il/exhibitions/2014/face-to-face/pdf/9.pdf
Lenzner, R. (2001). Michael Steinhardt's Voyage Around His
Father in Forbes Magazine published
online 8th Nov. 2001 at: https://www.forbes.com/2001/11/08/1108steinhardt.html?sh=4f696faf28b8
Romey, K. (2018). 9,000-year-old mask stuns archaeologists,
raises eyebrows. National Geographic at: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/neolithic-stone-mask-discovery-archaeology-forgery#:~:text=The%20stone%20mask%20was%20recovered,in%20the%20southern%20West%20Bank.
Steinhardt, M. (2001). No Bull: My Life In and Out of
Markets. Wiley, New York.
Vidal, M. (2021). How the world’s oldest masks tell a story
of Palestinian dispossession. Middle East Eye at: https://www.middleeasteye.net/discover/palestine-ancient-masks-dispossession
Yakar, R. and Hershkovitz, I., 1988. Nahal Hemar cave: The
modelled skulls. Atiqot, 18, pp.59-63.
Zion, I. B. (2014). Israel reveals eerie
collection of Neolithic ‘spirit’ masks. Times of Israel at: https://www.timesofisrael.com/eerie-neolithic-masks-to-make-israel-museum-debut/
