Hillel I. Newman, «A Hippodrome on the Road to Ephrath», Vol. 86 (2005) 213-228
LXX to Gen 48,7 refers to a hippodrome in the vicinity of
Rachel’s Tomb. This cannot be satisfactorily explained as an exegetical creation
of the translator’s imagination and probably refers to a genuine structure. This
is also true of the stadium or hippodrome mentioned in Tg. Onq. to Gen
14,17, as the meeting place of Abram, the king of Sodom, and Melchizedek. Since
1QapGen locates the same meeting in the Valley of Beth Hakerem, which should be
identified as the valley between Ramat Rahel and Bethlehem, it is reasonable to
assume that both versions refer to the same hippodrome. There is no textual
justification for assuming a late interpolation in LXX and no geographical or
archeological justification for explaining these passages as allusions to a
Herodian hippodrome. LXX may attest to a case of profound Hellenistic influence
in Judea already under Ptolemaic rule.
A Hippodrome on the Road to Ephrath 225
apparently continued uninterrupted from the Persian period through
the beginning of the Hellenistic period, during which time Beth
Hakerem seems to have retained its status as a regional administrative
capital. This would be in keeping with the general character of
Ptolemaic rule in Judea, which introduced a system of toparchies that
were the heirs of the districts of Persian administration — a system
which in general persisted with minor changes even under Roman
rule (45). According to Aharoni, the site was abandoned at the beginning
of the second century BCE, perhaps at the time of Antiochus III’s
conquest of Jerusalem around 199 BCE. Yet some of the stamp types
which Aharoni attributed to the third century BCE were subsequently
found in well-defined stratigraphic contexts of the second century
BCE in excavations in Jerusalem (46), suggesting the possibility that
settlement continued at Beth Hakerem later than he supposed. After its
abandonment, the town remained uninhabited till some time in the first
century BCE, but the restored settlement was of a different nature
altogether. No longer a capital city, it reemerged in the Herodian period
as a small village of artisans and farmers. It was probably during this
chapter in its history that stones were brought from the Valley of Beth
Hakerem for construction of the altar and its ramp in the Temple of
Jerusalem (mMid 3,4). The site was abandoned once again at the time
of the Great Revolt and was resettled only in the third century CE by
soldiers of the Tenth Legion.
As far as may be learned from the material evidence currently at
our disposal, Beth Hakerem was a major center during the Ptolemaic
period (and perhaps later as well), but in the days of Herod its
importance was greatly diminished. Comparing these conclusions to
the literary sources discussed earlier, we note that on the one hand the
heyday of Beth Hakerem corresponds chronologically to the testimony
of LXX regarding the hippodrome (granting the common dating of
LXX to the third century BCE), and on the other hand, a supposed
(45) A. SCHALIT, König Herodes. Der Mann und sein Werk (Berlin 1969) 183-
229; Z. SAFRAI, Boundaries and Administration in the Land of Israel in the Period
of the Mishnah and Talmud (Tel-Aviv 1980) 66-118 (Hebrew); H.M. COTTON,
“Some Aspects of Roman Administration of Judaea/Syria-Palaestinaâ€, Lokale
Autonomie und römische Ordnungsmacht in den kaiserzeitlichen Provinzen vom
1. bis 3. Jahrhundert (Hrsg. W. ECK) (Schriften des Historischen Kollegs.
Kolloquien 42; München 1999) 84-86.
(46) See AVIGAD, “More Evidence on the Judean Post-Exilic Stampsâ€; ID.,
Bullae and Seals from a Post-Exilic Judean Archive (Qedem 4; Jerusalem 1976)
27-28; R. REICH, “Local Seal Impressions of the Hellenistic Periodâ€.