3
The Sinai as Christian Space
When John of Damascus (d. 749) discussed the things that Christians in his time venerated, he ranked several holy objects and places just below the majesty of the Lord, describing them as “receptacles of divine energy.” Of those receptacles, he considered two locations especially holy: Mount Sinai and Nazareth, because the former is where God made himself manifest and the latter the site where Christ was granted flesh. (Where Mary became pregnant, that is, not where Jesus was born.) Lesser objects and locations of veneration included the Manger, Golgotha, and even the True Cross.1 The Sinai, which had remained a barren wilderness until the middle of the fourth century, had in just four centuries come to stand even above the sites of Jesus’s birth and death as a location of intense spiritual power. The importance of Mount Sinai was clear even on the other side of the Christian world, as the Exodus account’s description of the Sinai was used to create sacred Christian space in Ireland.2
In this chapter I will examine how sites in the Sinai were identified and associated with biblical events and people, and how these identifications were transmitted, modified, and enhanced throughout the three centuries of Christian rule of the Sinai Peninsula. I chiefly analyze the mental associations of three prominent locations there—Elim, Pharan, and Mount Sinai—with locations and events recorded in the book of Exodus.3 These traditions were invented by the early Christian monks and pilgrims and developed into a social memory of the Sinai as a Christian space.4 These social memories were constructed for the specific purpose of enhancing the sanctity of the Sinai and the monks practicing there. They were then passed on to the wider Mediterranean society through the voyages of pilgrims and the dissemination of pilgrimage accounts and other Christian texts.
Pilgrims provide our most important evidence concerning the topographic Christianization of sites in the Sinai, although other ecclesiastical sources and iconographic depictions also reflect the association of sites with biblical descriptions. The pilgrims consciously sought out places from the Old and the New Testament that allowed them to “see” the events of the Bible.5 According to E. D. Hunt, “there was no limit to the possibilities of bringing the Bible to life before his [the fourth-century Bordeaux pilgrim’s] eyes; the biblical associations (no matter how fragile) constituted the credentials of a pilgrim site, distinguishing it as a holy place.”6
A few decades after the journey of the Bordeaux pilgrim, Cyril, the bishop of Jerusalem, advocated for the importance of visiting holy sites in a speech to his catechumens at the time of their baptism.7 Cyril’s holy places, although rooted in Jerusalem, where he was bishop, encompassed all the regions in which Christ lived.8 Cyril argued that the holy places were direct proof of the events of the Gospel, as the following statement makes clear: “He was truly crucified for our sins. For if you would wish to deny it, the fact that this place is visible, this blessed Golgotha, proves you wrong, in which we are now assembled on account of Him who was crucified on this very spot; and the whole world has since been filled with pieces of the wood of the Cross.”9 According to Cyril, the association of physical places with biblical events served to add credence to the truth of biblical accounts.10 Cyril had an ulterior motive in promoting Jerusalem as a holy place, for by encouraging believers to visit the sites associated with Christ, Cyril also promoted his authority as bishop of Jerusalem and the importance of the bishop of Jerusalem over his local rival at Caesarea.11
The priority given to John of Damascus’s Sinai demonstrates the success of venerating holy places in the early Christian world. Just as the institutions and people of the Roman Empire became more Christian throughout the fourth century, so too did the topographic landscape become increasingly Christian. Regions that lacked biblical connections tended to focus sacralization through the construction of Christian edifices (often to local martyrs) and the destruction or co-option of the structures of rival faiths.12 This is not to say that previous rituals or beliefs were not incorporated into Christian practice, as was the case at the famous Oak of Mamre, but the construction of a monumental Christian structure there demonstrated the “superiority” of the new faith.13 The transition from pagan to Christian structures also involved the shifting of urban life and topography, as was the case in Jerash, where the previous focal point of the city had been the Temple of Artemis.14 In the Sinai, Christianization was based on a conscious imprinting of biblical places and events onto fourth-century (and later) locations. The erection of Christian structures at sites that became associated with biblical events was of only secondary importance, though these churches and memorials indicate the codification of biblical identifications.
As noted by John of Damascus, the most important event of the Exodus, the transfer of divine Law to Moses by God himself, resulted in Mount Sinai’s becoming one of the holiest places for Christians. In contrast to other sites in the Holy Land, which had been the focus of Jewish veneration and pilgrimage traditions, there was no such Jewish tradition of pilgrimage that Christians could follow in the veneration of Mount Sinai.15 What evidence exists for Jewish locations of Mount Sinai places it either in northwest Arabia or else at other locations in the southern Sinai different from where Christians came to venerate the site.16 Christians could therefore superimpose their own conceptions of the Exodus onto their contemporary Sinai without worrying about prior traditions.
Because there was no Jewish tradition of venerating the physical Mount Sinai, Sinai Christians did not have to use rhetoric to fight the claims of the Jews to the region, as was the case with holy sites in Palestine. According to Andrew Jacobs, “by layering biblical place-names over contemporary toponyms Eusebius [in the Onomasticon] transforms the Jewish present [in Palestine] into the Christian past, initiating a sort of linguistic and historical telescoping. . . . In this way Eusebius simultaneously absorbs the holy land Jews into a facet of Christian identity.”17 Through supersession, reading the Exodus account was a Christian act. In the Sinai, the Old Testament connections served to sacralize Sinai space as proof of ownership against a different opponent—the nomads, whose land the Sinai monks and pilgrims had intruded on. Eusebius and Egeria make this connection clear, as both indicate that the Sinai belonged to the Saracens.18 Through renaming and associating Sinai sites with Christian events, the Christians erased indigenous understandings of the land. In this way, the Sinai monks and pilgrims acted like other colonizers in world history, as for example in North America and in Israel.19
However, just as Cyril’s promotion of the holy places of Jerusalem had the effect of increasing the stature of his see against Caesarea, the association of biblical sites in the Sinai was influenced by local concerns, especially regarding the location of Elim and the ethnic status of the Pharanites. According to Egeria and the Piacenza pilgrim, Elim was located in the northwestern Sinai, whereas Ammonius and Cosmas Indicopleustes placed it at the monastic center at Rhaithou. That different sites were associated with the same biblical events is not particularly rare—several examples are known from the Holy Land—but this disagreement provides a window into understanding the role of biblical associations in the Sinai.20 Both Ammonius and Cosmas Indicopleustes seem to be promoting the spiritual power of the monks of Rhaithou by connecting them with the Exodus account. At Pharan, which was linked to the biblical Raphidim, the inhabitants appear to have crafted an identity connecting them with Moses and not to Ishmael. This identification may have been motivated by an attempt to separate themselves from the nomads of the Sinai and to reinforce Pharanite connections with the monastic communities.
IDENTIFYING BIBLICAL SITES IN THE SINAI PENINSULA
The methods used to associate late-antique Sinai locations with biblical events were quite simple. Monks associated biblical events with prominent landmarks such as mountains, caves, and large or interesting rocks. When guiding pilgrims, the monks stopped at these locations. The monks or pilgrims then read out and quoted specific passages from Exodus that they believed described the places where they were then standing or the events or people associated with them. Like Cyril, they believed that these writings proved that the contemporary locations of the Sinai were the actual sites mentioned in the Scriptures.
Marah, the Wilderness of Sur, Elim, and the Desert Sin
Just as the ancient Israelites had entered the Sinai from Egypt, the majority of pilgrims began their journey to the Sinai at Clysma.21 As the pilgrims traveled across the Sinai, they visited locations that they believed were mentioned in the Old Testament. They then conflated the contemporary late-antique sites in the Sinai with the people and events of the Exodus account. From Clysma, the pilgrims visited four locations that they believed had also been visited by the ancient Israelites before reaching the town of Pharan: Marah, the wilderness of Sur, Elim, and the desert Sin.
The portions of Egeria’s Itinerarium describing her journey from Clysma to Mount Sinai, which would have included an account of Elim, do not survive, though some of her testimony has been preserved by Peter the Deacon.22 Beginning her account after the Israelites crossed the Red Sea, Egeria describes the desert of Sur (Latinizing the Septuagint’s reading Σουρ) as stretching for an “infinite” distance, with an immense amount of sand. Her comment that “they [the Israelites] walked for three days without water” repeats the Exodus account, although in her day there was only one stopping place (mansio) in the wilderness of Sur. After traveling along the shore, Egeria came to the place she called “Marra” (Μερρα).23 She equated this site with Marah, describing two fountains and a number of small palm trees there.24 She mentions both the bitter water and the tree that Moses threw into the water to make it potable.25
After a three-day journey from Marra, Egeria arrived at a place called Arandara, which she equated with Helim (Elim, Αιλιμ).26 Arandara lies between Clysma and Pharan in the northwestern region of the peninsula, along the shore. Egeria noted a small stream there providing an abundant supply of water. Many plants grew around the oasis, and many palm trees. She does not mention the exact number of seventy palm trees and twelve fountains as in Exodus and later authors, but this omission may result from the transmission of the passage through Peter the Deacon.27 Alternatively, the lack of an exact quote from Exodus regarding the number of trees and fountains suggests that this identification was based on its location in the northwestern Sinai. Later writers who placed Elim off the Israelites’ track felt that it was necessary to cite the exact wording of the biblical passage in order to justify the geographic incongruities of their identification of Elim.
After leaving Elim, Egeria described two large mountains that she believed marked the point where the Israelites first received manna from God.28 She must have identified her location as the desert of Sin. She claims that the place was “called the desert of Pharan,” a much different location than the town of that name.29 The surrounding mountains were dotted with small caves, which Egeria described as offering excellent bedchambers. These, she claimed, were marked by Hebrew letters, suggesting that she was now in Wadi Mukattab.30 To Egeria, the inscriptions created a tangible connection between the desert and the Scriptures. The place also had a well with water, but it was not so abundant as at Elim. This was a poor land, unable to grow crops or grapes, and the water could support only a few palm trees.31
Whereas Egeria associated Elim with a site in the northwestern Sinai Peninsula, Ammonius’s Relatio places Elim at Rhaithou, which is located on the southwestern shore of the Sinai. Though Ammonius does not explicitly mention the name Elim, he does describe the site as having once had twelve springs and seventy palm trees, as Elim does in the book of Exodus.32 In Ammonius’s time, the site had many more palm trees.33 Since he directly quotes the Exodus account, it can be assumed that he associated Elim with Rhaithou.34
Cosmas Indicopleustes’ account begins in the desert of Sur at a place that he identified as Phoinikon (Palm Grove).35 His description of the desert of Sur describes how the sun was so unbearably hot that God gave the Israelites shelter with a cloud and directed their passage at night. The fact that he chooses to quote Psalm 105:39, “He spread a cloud for a covering; and fire to give light by night,” helps to identify this location with the desert of Sur. The Psalms verse further enhances the scriptural connections of the desert of Sur, layering biblical associations and increasing the sacredness of the site.
Cosmas’s identification of Phoinikon may be related to that given by Diodorus Siculus, quoting Agatharcides. Diodorus explained how Phoinikon supplied abundant water and supported numerous palm trees.36 This Phoinikon seems to be associated with the biblical Marah; however, Cosmas does not mention the biblical events associated with Marah here. Instead, during his description of Elim, he mentions that God commanded Moses to celebrate the Sabbath at Marah.37 Cosmas must be referring to Exodus 15:26, where it is stated that God gave Moses instructions, but the passage does not specifically mention the Sabbath.38 Phoinikon may or may not be the same place as Egeria’s Marra.39
Agreeing with Ammonius, Cosmas Indicopleustes connected Elim with “the place we now call Rhaithou,” stating that Rhaithou is the location where the Israelites stopped while they were following the shore and that it marked the point where they finally turned into the desert.40 Geographically, this makes sense only in the context of the sixth-century monastic settlements, for Rhaithou is not on the Israelites’ path. Cosmas, echoing similar comments by Ammonius, mentions that the place had twelve fountains and had once had seventy palm trees but that in his day the palm trees were more numerous.41
The Piacenza pilgrim, visiting the Sinai approximately twenty years after Cosmas’s composition of the Christian Topography, placed Elim along the route between Pharan and the coast of the Red Sea. He names the site Magdalum and mentions the existence of a fort there called Surandala, which should perhaps be associated with Egeria’s Arandara.42 Apparently he considered this place Elim, because he specifically mentions seventy-two (sic) palm trees and twelve fountains. That he does not locate Elim on the southern coast, as Ammonius and Cosmas did, suggests that the Piacenza pilgrim followed the same route as Egeria.43 He does not mention Marah or Phoinikon in his account, nor either the desert Sur.
These four authors, Egeria, Ammonius, Cosmas Indicopleustes, and the Piacenza pilgrim, each saw the late-antique topography of the Sinai through a lens crafted by the Old Testament. Although each author may not be responsible for creating the Christian cognitive associations that each reflects, they all preserve a significant contribution to the understanding of the late-antique Sinai. Of the attributions described here, the shifting location of Elim proves the most interesting. Whereas Egeria and the Piacenza pilgrim placed Elim on the route between Clysma and Mount Sinai, Ammonius and Cosmas located it on the southwestern shore, at the monastic center of Rhaithou. This cannot be a matter of simple chronological variations, because Cosmas wrote between the time of Egeria and the Piacenza pilgrim. Rather, it seems that Ammonius and Cosmas connected Rhaithou with Elim because of the existence of the large monastic community there.44 Cosmas visited the site, and Ammonius claims to record the narrative of a monk from Rhaithou. This report suggests that the monks at Rhaithou actively cultivated a biblical heritage for themselves, known to those who visited the site or encountered monks from there. They would have done this in order to give biblical justification for their monastic settlement and to enhance their own spiritual journeys, also increasing their own sanctity as well. As discussed above, monks were seen as the equals of the holy places and biblical figures.45 Thus by associating their site with biblical Elim and the prophet Moses, the monks at Rhaithou could themselves be associated with biblical events and personages. Furthermore, such an association suggests a spiritual competition between the monks at Rhaithou and those at Mount Sinai, one in which those at Rhaithou felt inferior and required a significant biblical connection in order to enhance and justify their spiritual discipline.
Pharan and the Creation of a Biblical Identity
After Elim, the next major site on the Israelite itinerary was a place called Raphidim, located in the desert of Sin.46 When Egeria visited the Sinai in the fourth century, she wrote that Raphidim was located at the town Pharan, which lay in the Wadi Feiran approximately equidistant from the western shore of the Sinai Peninsula and Mount Sinai. This site, Pharan, was originally founded in the late first century B.C.E. by settlers of the Nabataean Kingdom, which claimed control over the Sinai at that time. Little is known of the town prior to the fourth century, even after several seasons of excavations.47 The Pharanites converted to Christianity, possibly in the late fourth century.48 It became one of the most important Christian locations in the Sinai, as it was the home of Sinai’s only bishop before the Islamic Conquest, and several churches were constructed there.49
During late antiquity, the biblical identity of Pharan and the Pharanites was in flux. Eusebius connected Pharan to Paran, the desert where Ishmael roamed in Genesis, but he also associated the site with biblical Raphidim. Ammonius took the connection of Pharan with Paran to the next logical step: that the Pharanites were descendants of Ishmael, and therefore he called them Ishmaelites.50 Egeria, Cosmas Indicopleustes, and the Piacenza pilgrim instead associate Pharan with Raphidim, not Paran. This connection linked Pharan and the Pharanites with Moses and his father-in-law, Jethro, and denied any connection between Pharan, Ishmael, and the Saracens. Accordingly it is implied that the Pharanites upon converting to Christianity actively sought to associate themselves with the Christian monks, transforming their own self-image.
As with the site of Elim, late-antique Christian authors used evidence from Exodus to identify contemporary sites with biblical events. The testimony of Eusebius in the Onomasticon concerning the location of Raphidim is ambiguous. Although he links Pharan with Raphidim, it seems that he did not locate Raphidim at Pharan. He described Raphidim as a site near Mount Choreb where water flowed out of a rock, and he asserted that the name meant “Temptation.” Finally, he added that Joshua fought Amalek near Pharan.51 Locating Raphidim with this description can be quite confusing, because Eusebius seems to identify two different places as Raphidim. First, he locates it “next to Mount Choreb,” whereas later he implies that Raphidim was actually located “on” Mount Choreb. The problem seems to be that Eusebius considered Choreb to be a mountain, whereas the Septuagint text of Exodus simply uses the term “Choreb” (Χωρηβ) to describe the entire peninsula.52 Elsewhere in the Onomasticon, Eusebius says that Raphidim is located “near Pharan.” Since Pharan lies about fifty kilometers away from Mount Sinai today, either Eusebius was confused about the topography and location of sites within the Sinai or he believed that Mount Sinai was located elsewhere than in the place that later became accepted. This too is possible, since the first known monks and pilgrims did not venture into the Sinai until after the Onomasticon was composed. Most likely, Eusebius confused the toponym “Choreb,” referring to the entire peninsula, with Mount Sinai. Because Eusebius did not in fact travel to the Sinai, he had no need to ensure that his descriptions matched the actual geography of the place.
In the Onomasticon entry on Pharan, Eusebius does not mention Raphidim or the events that occurred there. Instead, Eusebius describes how Pharan was a city in the Saracen desert, which was the dwelling place of Ishmael, from whom the Ishmaelites originated. He adds that the Israelites passed through this region (the Saracen desert), marching “from Mount Sinai.”53 He then situates Pharan into the fourth-century geography of the region by locating it in the south of the province of Arabia and three days’ journey from Aila. Here Pharan is connected to Paran, which appears in the Hebrew Bible as the roaming ground of Ishmael, who was sent away by Abraham to please his legitimate wife, Sarah.54 According to patristic sources, the various Arab tribes, whom Roman sources generally called “Saracens,” were all descended from Ishmael.55 Eusebius’s description of Pharan, therefore, implies that he believed that the inhabitants of Pharan were Arab descendants of Ishmael. That the city of Pharan is located “in the Saracen desert” implies that the city was inhabited by Saracens and demonstrates their occupation of the Sinai prior to the arrival of Christian monks.56 These were the groups that were dispossessed as a result of monastic development and the linking of Sinai sites with biblical locales.
Egeria’s travelogue demonstrates that monastic traditions had already established the Sinai locations of Exodus sites. Her account unambiguously associates Raphidim with Pharan. She knew Pharan as the place where Amalek fought the sons of Israel, where people murmured for water, and where Moses met with Jethro. She mentioned that a church was erected on the spot where Moses directed the battle against Amalek and erected an altar to commemorate the victory.57 The fact that the church was erected on the spot where she reports that Moses stood during the battle indicates that the inhabitants of Pharan were consciously using the Exodus account in the Christianization of their town. The connection with Raphidim is further enhanced by the fact that this hill (with its church) overlooks Pharan. Egeria could not have got her information from Eusebius, who as pointed out above did not strongly associate Raphidim with Pharan. One may imagine that her Pharanite guides described the importance of the site and told her that the church was built to commemorate the event.58
Two centuries later, Cosmas Indicopleustes also connects Pharan with Raphidim but elaborates on the earlier biblical associations with quotations from Psalms and the New Testament to reflect a further Christianization of the site. Cosmas notes that the Israelites came into Raphidim, which was now called Pharan, and then relates an embellished story about how Moses made water flow from the rock of Mount Choreb. (It may be of interest that he connects this event to three verses in the Psalms that are not mentioned by any other source.)59 Then he connects the spring of Raphidim with Paul’s Rock of Christ, thereby associating events from the Old Testament with the New.60 Finally, he mentions the battle between Amalek, the meeting between Jethro and Moses, and the circumcision of Moses’ second son.61 This last event is not connected elsewhere with the Raphidim story in the book of Exodus. Probably it was a local invention, possibly devised to further associate the inhabitants of Pharan with the Israelites’ religion. Not only is Pharan connected with Raphidim of the Exodus account, but it became associated with the rite of circumcision and the Israelite religion through Psalms (78:15–16, 105:41) and the New Testament.
Later in the sixth century, when the Piacenza pilgrim described Pharan, he did not specifically use the name Raphidim, even though he clearly associates the events of Raphidim with Pharan. He mentions that Moses fought Amalek at Pharan, and that there was an oratorium set up above the rocks where Moses stood, echoing the description by Egeria.62 He also adds new details connecting Moses with the site. The Piacenza pilgrim claims that Pharan was inhabited by the descendants of Jethro, who visited his son-in-law Moses from Midian.63 Although the Latin word that the Piacenza pilgrim used, “dicitur,” is impersonal and does not mention his source, there seem to be three possibilities. First, the story could have been a local tradition told to him by inhabitants of Pharan. Second, the genealogy of Pharanites may have been promoted by the monks of the Sinai, and either accepted or not by the Pharanites. Or, last, the descent of the Pharanites may have been imposed by outsiders and disseminated via pilgrimage accounts like this one. Within these possibilities, there was an opportunity for the Pharanites to shape their own self-image; but it is also possible that the image of the Pharanites in our sources has nothing to do with the Pharanite self-image. Nevertheless, it seems doubtful that the inhabitants of Pharan would have opposed the identification of Pharanites as descendants of Jethro, since this would connect them directly to Moses. As there were several church constructions at sites associated with Moses at Pharan, it seems likely that the inhabitants of Pharan acted, perhaps unconsciously, to enhance their connection with Moses by adopting an identity that established their descent from Jethro.
It is of interest that the Piacenza pilgrim locates the fountain of Moses on Mount Sinai and not at Pharan.64 He is most likely interpreting Exodus 17:6, which Egeria located at Pharan. This passage mentions the rock “at Choreb,” and therefore he must have thought that it was located on or near Mount Sinai and not at Pharan.65 Here the author has confused Choreb meaning the Sinai Peninsula with Mount Sinai itself. At this point in the pilgrimage account, the Piacenza pilgrim has not mentioned meeting monks, and thus he may have located the fountain entirely on his own, explaining the discrepancy with Egeria.
Among these authors, Eusebius and Ammonius (both of whom called the Pharanites “Ishmaelites”) mention Pharan in connection with Ishmael. The remaining authors—Egeria, Cosmas, and the Piacenza pilgrim, mention Pharan only in connection with Raphidim. The linkage of Pharan and Raphidim suggests that these authors did not view the Pharanites as Ishmaelites or Saracens, since they never use these terms to describe the Pharanites. It seems that the Pharanites actively cultivated an alternative identity by erecting churches to commemorate biblical events. Pharanite guides may have actively promoted the connection of the city with Raphidim by teaching pilgrims about the site. This process was so successful that by the sixth century “it [was] said that the Pharanites are the descendants of Jethro.”66
Mount Sinai
Eusebius’s testimony in the Onomasticon seems confused about the location of Mount Sinai, echoing the problems mentioned above regarding Pharan.67 Eusebius writes that Choreb “is the mountain of God located in Midian. It lies next to Mount Sinai in the desert beyond Arabia.”68 From this sentence alone, it appears that Eusebius does not know whether Mount Choreb was Mount Sinai or a nearby mountain. Jerome’s translation of the Onomasticon states that the two mountains (Mount Choreb and Mount Sinai) were the same but that two different names were used for it.69 Since neither author visited the Sinai, there was no need for their descriptions to match physical locations; nor were they able to personally verify the physical locations.
On the other hand, Eusebius’s description of another location, Kata ta Chrusea, suggests that he located Mount Sinai near its later-identified location. According to Eusebius, Kata ta Chrusea “is a mountain full of gold dust in the desert, lying eleven days away from Mount Choreb and next to which Moses wrote Deuteronomy; and it is said that a long time ago the mountain of gold mines [i.e., Kata ta Chrusea] lay next to the copper mines at Phaino in the Wadi Araba.”70 Here Eusebius is essentially quoting Deuteronomy in the use of “eleven days” and the term “Mount Choreb,” but Deuteronomy mentions Kadeshbarnea, not Kata ta Chrusea.71 Jerome adds that the mines at Phaino, famous for the numbers of Christians martyred there during the Great Persecution, were still being worked in his time.72 An interval of eleven days is mentioned in Deuteronomy, but it also approximated the time that Christian pilgrims would have spent traveling between Phaino and Mount Sinai. By mentioning Mount Choreb in connection with still-existing copper mines, this description helps situate Mount Sinai as a tangible place instead of a purely spiritual location.
As with the other sites mentioned in this chapter, Egeria wrote the first surviving eyewitness description of Mount Sinai. She was guided by two different factors, the Bible and local traditions, when identifying the various locations at Mount Sinai. Her most important source was Exodus itself, which she cites with the phrase “quae scripta sunt.” When present at a specifically biblical location, such as the summit of Mount Sinai, she would consult her Bible and read about it.73 Her other source for information was either guides or monks who pointed out important locations. When she wondered which mountain was Mount Sinai, she questioned one of the monks in the area.74 In another passage, while on Mount Sinai, she says explicitly that she asked the monks to show her the important places mentioned in the Bible.75 Monks pointed out the cave in which Moses rested while ascending the mountain so that he could receive the tablets of the Law, then the place where he broke the tablets because of the Golden Calf, and the other places that Egeria wished to see.76 (She is not more specific.) Elijah’s cave was shown to her, and she noted that a church had been erected in front of this cave to commemorate his refuge. In the same place, the monks pointed out the altar that Elijah built as an offering to the Lord.77 There she read the specific passage from the Bible, prayed, and took the Eucharist.78 Egeria was also able to identify sites on the basis of memorials erected to mark biblical events, such as when she saw the site of the Golden Calf.79 Upon climbing higher on Mount Choreb, Egeria was shown the place where Aaron and the seventy elders awaited Moses while he received the Law. A huge stone marked the place that the monks associated with Aaron.80 Once again, to cement the connection with Moses, the appropriate passage in the Bible was read aloud with the addition of suitable psalms.81
Egeria approached Mount Sinai from Pharan, which she reckoned to lie thirty-five Roman miles away from Pharan.82 She notes a wide plain in which the tribes of Israel waited for Moses for forty days and nights while he ascended and remained on the mountain of God.83 She also links this valley to his exile when he was a shepherd and God first spoke to him from the Burning Bush.84 The path from Pharan required Egeria’s entourage to climb part of Mount Sinai to reach the Burning Bush, which they admired for a long time.85 On the other side of the mountain they were joined by monks who pointed out places mentioned in the Bible.86
Egeria’s description of Mount Sinai vividly conveys her impressions of the mountain. Throughout her text she describes Mount Sinai as the holy mountain of God; however, once she arrived in the region of Mount Sinai, she realized that the area was covered with many mountains.87 She later learned that Mount Sinai was not the tallest mountain, but nevertheless she describes the other mountains as “small hills” compared with the height of Mount Sinai.88 At the top, she wrote about being able to see Egypt, Palestine, the Red Sea, the eastern Mediterranean, and the vast lands of the Saracens; so great was the view that she “could hardly believe it.”89
Egeria ascended the mountain on a Sunday, describing it as “where the Law was given and the very place where the majesty of God descended on the day when the mountain smoked.”90 Its chief features were a small church and the Cave of Moses. Although a monk was present in the small church when Egeria arrived, no one resided on top of the mountain, because of the sacred nature of the site and the lack of provisions.91
It is easy to see why Eusebius would have been confused about the location and the name of Mount Sinai, because when Egeria visited she noted the large numbers of high mountains in the area. One, in fact, was the location of a church and was located right next to Mount Sinai.92 Egeria reported that its name was “In Choreb,” a translation from the Septuagint’s ἐν Χωρηβ.93 Later she refers to the mountain simply as Choreb. This place was connected with the biblical story of the prophet Elijah, who fled from King Ahab. Egeria quotes directly from the translation of the Septuagint the words of God: “Quid tu hic, Helias?”94
After so much travel, climbing up and down the mountains in the region, Egeria and her party finally reached the largest concentration of monastic cells. This community grew up organically around the remains of a bush, which they identified as the Burning Bush from Exodus. This bush was shown to Egeria, who remarked that it was still alive and sending out shoots of new growth.95 She described it as “the Bush . . . from which the Lord spoke to Moses in the fire.”96 Almost as important, the monks pointed out the very spot where Moses stood before the Burning Bush and the place where God commanded Moses to remove his shoes because he was standing on holy ground.97 She mentions this location and the quote twice in her account, perhaps symbolizing the profound importance of the location and associating the words of God with her own journey to the Holy Land. This event and its commemoration in front of the Burning Bush provides the most tangible and explicit indication that the Sinai was terra sancta.
These associations were later made apparent by the Moses mosaics on a wall directly in front of the supposed Burning Bush. One shows Moses standing in front of the Burning Bush.98 He is resting his foot on a rock, and his hands are reaching for the straps of his sandal. One shoe is already removed from his back foot and is lying on the ground. Moses is averting his gaze from the Burning Bush and staring into the sky. The scene clearly recalls the passage in Exodus stating that he was standing on holy ground.99 As Kurt Weitzmann inquires, “Who, in looking at Moses loosening his sandals, would not be aware that right behind this wall there is the Chapel of the Burning Bush, the locus sanctus of the monastery?”100 Clearly this scene was selected to impress upon the monks and pilgrims that they too stood before the Burning Bush of lore and that they too were standing on holy ground. The scene works to enhance the already-known biblical importance of the site by giving a visual reminder of what had previously only been read. By seeing the site (and the sight) with their own eyes, the importance of the Burning Bush was ingrained into the minds of visiting pilgrims.
Egeria’s guides showed her numerous other places in the area—for example, the place where the Golden Calf was built, marked by a large stone, and the place where the Israelites awaited Moses while he was on Mount Sinai.101 The monks pointed out the place where Moses, descending from the mountain, saw them dancing around the Golden Calf and in anger threw down and smashed the tablets containing the original Law.102 The locations of many other events were shown to Egeria and her party, including the dwellings of the Israelites and the place where the Golden Calf was destroyed on the order of Moses.103 She saw where Moses erected the earliest form of the Tabernacle and where the Israelites celebrated Passover for the first time after they had left Egypt.104 Finally, Egeria saw in the valley below Mount Sinai the graves of the people who lusted and were killed by a plague.105 This is one of the few places in her account where she directly mentions the “sins” of the Israelites.
FIGURE 2. Mosaic in the basilica church at Saint Catherine’s Monastery depicting Moses removing his sandal. (Forsyth and Weitzmann 1973, pl. CXXVI; reproduced through the courtesy of the Michigan-Princeton-Alexandria Expeditions to Mount Sinai.)
It may be of interest that Egeria places events that do not occur around Mount Sinai in the biblical account around the valley beneath Mount Sinai. In one instance, she mentions a fountain that Moses created so that the people could drink; however, according to Exodus, and even Egeria, this event appears in the valley near Raphidim, not below Mount Sinai. This passage from Exodus mentions Mount Choreb in the same chapter and therefore may have confused Egeria, who had already cited this passage at Raphidim.106 In another instance, she mentions a place called Incendium, where a fire destroyed a number of the people’s tents but Moses was able to put out the fire with prayer. In Exodus, this took place after the Israelites had left the valley beneath Mount Sinai.107 Egeria also mentions the place where the people begged Moses for food and where quails and manna fell from the sky. Though this happened twice during the Exodus account, neither event took place at Mount Sinai.108 In two other places, Egeria mentions that she saw the place where the seventy elders took the spirit of God into their souls, but this event also occurred after the Israelites had left Mount Sinai.109 It seems therefore that events in the Exodus account that did not take place in a specific location were located at Mount Sinai. This could have been for convenience, for commemorating these events would be easier if they were located near the settlements. One could also argue that these other events layered additional biblical connections to Mount Sinai.
Although Egeria’s account of Mount Sinai is the longest, other sources also describe the late-antique Mount Sinai through biblical passages. Procopius’s short description of Mount Sinai indicates that he was aware of the legends surrounding it, but it mentions the religious significance of the site only in passing. He writes, “the steep and awesomely wild mountain called Sinai hangs somewhere near the place called the Red Sea.”110 This mountain seems imbued with spiritual power because of the terrible noises heard continuously at night. He repeats Egeria’s comment that no human being is able to remain on top of the mountain after dark.111 Procopius reminds the reader that Mount Sinai is the place where God gave Moses the divine Law, but this seems to be an afterthought in his account.112 Procopius was more interested in the natural and supernatural (fantastic but not divine) features of Mount Sinai rather than in the theological importance of the site. Having never visited Mount Sinai, he is not very instructive about the local traditions and identifications there.
Finally, the Piacenza pilgrim stresses the spiritual importance of the journey to Mount Sinai. When he visited the Sinai Peninsula, his party approached Mount Sinai from the north after traveling through the Negev Desert; therefore, his account of the Sinai Peninsula’s Christian locations begins with Mount Sinai. His first association of the peninsula with biblical events occurs immediately upon his arrival in the region around Mount Sinai. As mentioned above, he describes the place where Moses drew water out of the rock on the day before he went to Mount Choreb prior to ascending Mount Sinai. Whereas Egeria places this event at both Pharan and Mount Choreb, the Piacenza pilgrim places it before (i.e., north of) Mount Sinai. We are not informed how he identified this location, only that he was following Exodus 17:6.113 At this point in the narrative, he has not mentioned meeting monks, and he does not say that the location was pointed out. It seems most likely that he based his identification of the site entirely on the Exodus account and the confusion of Choreb with Mount Sinai.
After crossing the mountains, monks led the Piacenza pilgrim through the valley between Mount Sinai and Mount Choreb and brought his party to the place “where Moses saw the sign of the Burning Bush.” This place was marked by a fountain that provided water for sheep.114 By the time of the Piacenza pilgrim’s visit, the monastery that we now know as Saint Catherine’s had been constructed around the Burning Bush and this fountain.115
On the top of Mount Sinai, the Piacenza pilgrim identified a cave as the place where Elijah hid himself when he fled from Jezabel.116 Strangely, when Egeria mentions that cave, she places it on Mount Choreb, not Mount Sinai. At the top of the mountain stood a small oratorium, but the Piacenza pilgrim does not mention the event that it was said to commemorate. He also notes that no one was able to remain at the top of the mountain overnight, and that a monk would ascend each day and “perform the work of God.”117
The Piacenza pilgrim makes a distinction between Mount Sinai and Mount Choreb in terms of their relationship to the divine. He creates a dichotomy in which Mount Sinai is “divine ground,” whereas Mount Choreb is “worldly ground.”118 For this reason, Mount Sinai is surrounded by many monastic cells, but the monks do not physically dwell on the mountain.
FIGURE 3. Mosaic in the basilica church at Saint Catherine’s Monastery depicting Moses receiving the Law. (Forsyth and Weitzmann 1973, pl. CXXVII; reproduced through the courtesy of the Michigan-Princeton-Alexandria Expeditions to Mount Sinai.)
CONCLUSION
One of the mosaics in Saint Catherine’s depicts Moses standing in a chasm between two rocks. The mosaic is a graphic reminder that the monastery stands between two mountain ranges.119 Moses is seen stretching his hands toward the sky. He holds a tablet that is being handed to him by an arm thrust out of a cloud—clearly meant to be God’s. Moses averts his gaze and is staring down toward the rocks and the viewer. The scene invites the viewers also to avert their eyes in imitation of the prophet’s basking in the divine presence. This scene must have powerfully rewarded the pilgrims and monks with an immediate feeling of connection with the divine, stressing the importance of the site on which they stood. It invited the pilgrims and monks to act as witnesses of biblical events, and it blurred the distinction between the late-antique and Old Testament worlds.120
The Sinai tested the faith of all who traveled and lived there, but the journey and harshness of the conditions merely enhanced the Sinai Peninsula’s sanctity. Egeria’s monks were almost as holy as the Sinai itself, providing a link between the ancient Israelites and the fourth century. The Piacenza pilgrim was particularly interested in the manna and other fantastic spiritual details of the Sinai. He also sought to associate the sixth-century Sinai with the Exodus and believed that the people inhabiting the Sinai (as reflected in his discussion of the Pharanites) tangibly displayed the truth of the Exodus account. The fact that the Pharanites were Christian only further enhanced the transformation of the Sinai from a place inhabited by Saracens into a Christian landscape.
Cosmas Indicopleustes’ journey served to reinforce his belief in the superiority of the Christian message. He thought that the Sinai desert stood as a constant reminder of the truth of the Gospels for all people, especially the unbelievers, to see. The proof, in his eyes, was the strange writing on many of the rocks throughout the desert, which he believed were the writings of the wandering Israelites.121 The fact that the sites of the Sinai existed was proof that the Exodus account was true. The locations of the Bible were filled with Christians, and these Christians proved their superior claim to the Sinai through their holy lifestyles.
Although some of the events of Exodus shifted locations around the Sinai according to the needs or interpretations of the various authors, these discrepancies did not bother the pilgrims. In the end, they were not interested in assigning biblical events to exact locations in the Sinai. They desired only the spiritual benefits of the journey, but their accounts shaped outside perceptions of the Sinai. Through these writings, the experience of the pilgrims was spread throughout the Roman Empire, and the conception of the Sinai as a holy land was also dispersed.122
By the sixth century, the perception of the Sinai had been completely transformed from a virtual terra incognita to one of the most prominent locations in the Roman Empire.
Mount Sinai became a symbol of Christian piety and God’s love for the New Israel. If the monks who toiled “in a careful rehearsal of death,” as Procopius put it, were threatened, then it was important for the emperor to respond to those threats. According to Procopius, the emperor Justinian did just this by constructing a fortified monastery around the Burning Bush at the foot of Mount Sinai. Stories had circulated about how the monks faced martyrdom in the Sinai at the hands of people called Saracens, Blemmyes, and barbarians. These martyrdom accounts enhanced the spiritual characteristics of the Sinai monks, just as the prominent identifications of Sinai locations with biblical events had served to do so as well.
As the monks moved into the Sinai Peninsula, they came into contact with the indigenous population, whom the monks called Saracens and barbarians. In effect, the monks were taking this land from the locals and unconsciously needed to justify this act of colonization. By stressing biblical connections, the monks could claim to be the original inhabitants of the Sinai, just as Christians claimed to be the True Israel. In doing so, the monks deepened the antagonistic relationship between themselves and the locals, an antagonism that eventually led to the creation of martyrs in the Sinai.
1. John of Damascus, Contra Imaginum Calumniatores 3.34; see Maraval 1985, 146–48.
2. Collectio Canonum Hibernensis (ed. Wasserschleben 1885, 44.6a and 6b); Jenkins 2010, 90–91.
3. In Exodus, Sinai is the name of the mountain and Choreb the name of the region; whereas Choreb appears as the mountain of God in Deuteronomy (e.g., 1:6; also see 5:1–5) and 1 Kings 19:8 (Maraval 1985, 308–10; Hoffmeier 2005, 114–15). Many Christian sources in late antiquity confuse the
terms “Sinai” and “Choreb,” and some use them interchangeably. For example, Eusebius's Onomasticon considers Sinai and Choreb different mountains, whereas they are the same mountain in Jerome's translation. See below, “Mount Sinai.”
4. The same process occurred in Palestine: see Halbwachs 1941. I've replaced Halbwachs's “collective memory” with “social memory” via the criticisms of Olick and Robbins 1998. On this period as ushering in the invention of a tradition, see Caner 2010, 4.
5. Frank 2000.
6. Hunt 1982, 85.
7. Walker 1990.
8. Wilken 1992, 120.
9. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catecheses ad Illuminandos 4.10: “Oὗτος ἐσταυρώθη ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἀληθῶς. Κἂν γὰρ ἀρνήσασθαι βουληθῇς, ὁ τόπος ἐλέγχει σε φαινόμενος, ὁ μακάριος οὗτος Γολγοθὰς, ἐν ᾧ νῦν, διὰ τòν ἐν αὐτῷ σταυρωθέντα, συγκεκροτήμεθα. Καὶ τοῦ ξύλου τοῦ σταυροῦ πᾶσα λοιπòν ἡ οἰκουμένη κατὰ μέρος ἐπληρώθη.”
10. And it was not only places that became associated with the biblical accounts. Monks could be described as “Moses” or “Aaron,” effectively joining the past with the present (Frank 2000, esp. 165–82). The lives of biblical figures were reworked to conform to hagiographic conventions of the sixth century(?), and such reworkings served to appropriate further locations for the Christian faith. See Satran 1995.
11. Drijvers 2004, 154–64.
12. MacCormack 1990, 8–20; Curran 2000, 116–57; Caseau 2004; Jenkins 2010, 105–46.
13. E. Fowden 2002, 125–29.
14. See Wharton 1995, 64–73, 94–100.
15. On Christian adoptions of Jewish holy places, see Sivan 1990.
16. Kerkeslager 1998, 146–213; Hoffmeier 2005, 116–48. Hoffmeier concludes that Mount Sinai, according to information from Exodus, was most likely located in the southern Sinai, perhaps at Jabal Sufsafa near Jabal Musa or at Jabal Serbal near Wadi Feiran and not at its later Christian location.
17. Jacobs 2004, 35–36.
18. Eusebius, Onomasticon 166.12–17: “πόλις ἐστὶν ὑπὲρ τὴν Ἀραβίαν, παρακειμένη τοῖς ἐπὶ τῆς ἐρήμου Σαρακηνοῖς.” Egeria 3.8: “Egyptum autem et Palestinam et mare Rubrum et mare illut Parthenicum, quod mittit Alexandriam, nec non et fines Saracenorum infinitos ita subter nos inde videbamus, ut credi vix possit.”
19. On this idea, see the Introduction, pp. 6–8.
20. Halbwachs 1941, 184–91.
21. See chapter 2 for a lengthier discussion of pilgrimage routes. The most detailed modern discussion of the Israelite route is Hoffmeier 2005, 159–71, which includes a catalogue of modern attempts to identify the locations of biblical events.
22. Egeria believed that she was guided through the desert along the same route that the Israelites took when they fled from Egypt. When she returned to Clysma from Pharan, she described the journey along the shore and mistakenly mentioned that the Israelites traveled this same path after they had left the valley of the Sinai, despite the fact that the Israelites went east away from Mount Sinai, not west. C. Weber (1994, 21) says she must have erroneously thought about Numbers 10:12, which mentions the desert of Paran. Numbers 12:16 suggests that the Israelites traveled through Paran; however, the itinerary at Numbers 33:16–37 does not describe a journey to Paran. Egeria 6.3: “Filii etiam Israhel, revertentes a monte Dei Syna, usque ad eum locum reversi sunt per iter quod ierant, id est usque ad eum locum ubi de inter montes exivimus et iunximus nos denuo ad Mare Rubrum et inde nos iam iter nostrum quo veneramus reversi sumus: filii autem Israhel de eodem loco sicut scriptum est in libris sancti Moysi, ambulaverunt iter suum.” Egeria has clearly confused the desert of Paran, which surrounded Mount Sinai, with the town of Pharan west of Mount Sinai.
23. The name Maran seems to be related to a tribe mentioned by Agatharcides and quoted by Diodorus Siculus (3.43.1–2). According to Diodorus, the Maranites were killed at a festival by their neighbors, the Garindanes.
24. No biblical source mentions two fountains (Caner 2010, 215 no. 21).
25. Exodus 15:22–27. Petrus Diaconus Y.11 (v. 117): “Desertum uero Sur heremus est infinite magnitudinis, quantum potest umquam homo conspicere, et arena solitudinis illius inestimabilis, ubi triduo ambulauerunt sine aqua. A deserto autem Sur usque ad Maran est mansio una per ripas maris. In Maran uero arbores palmarum paucissimi sunt; sunt illic et duo fontes, quos indulcauit sanctus Moyses.”
26. Exodus 15:27. The name Arandara seems to be related to a tribe mentioned by Agatharcides and quoted by Diodorus Siculus (3.43.1–2).
27. Petrus Diaconus Y.12 (vv. 117–18): “Inde autem per triduum de sinistro heremus est infinitus usque in locum qui dicitur Arandara; Arandara autem est locus, qui appellatus est Helim. Ibi fluuius currit, qui tamen tempore aliquo siccatur, sed per ipsius alueum sive iusta ripam ipsius inueniuntur aque. Erba uero illic satis habundat, arbores autem palmarum illic plurime sunt. A transitu autem maris Rubri, id est Sur, non inuenitur tam amenus locus cum tanta et tali aqua et tam habundante nisi istum. Inde ergo media mansio iusta mare est.”
28. Exodus 16:1–36. Petrus Diaconus Y.13 (v. 118): “Demum uero apparent duo montes excelsi ualde, a parte uero sinistra, antequam ad montes venias, locus est, ubi pluit Dominus manna filiis Israhel; montes uero ipsi excelsi et erecti ualde sunt.” On manna, which may be tamarisk, and quails, see Hoffmeier 2005, 171–75.
29. See the discussion in the following section.
30. They were actually Nabataean: see Caner 2010, 214 no. 27.
31. Petrus Diaconus Y.14 (v. 118): “Montes uero toti per girum excauati sunt, taliter autem facte sunt cripte ille, ut, si suspendere uolueris uela, cubicula pulcherrima sint; unumquodque cubiculum est descriptum lidteris hebreis. Aque etiam ibi nonae et habundantes satis in extrema ualle sunt, sed non quales in Helim. Locus uero ipse uocatur desertus Pharan, unde missi sunt exploratores a Moyse, qui considerarent terram; ab utris uero partibus locus ille munitus est montibus. Non fert autem locus ille agros aut vineas nichilque aliut illic est nisi aqua et arbores palmarum.”
32. Exodus 15:27.
33. Ammonius Monachus, Relatio (CPA), fols. 10–11; (Greek) 8: “ἔνθα αἱ δώδεκα πηγαὶ καὶ οἱ ἑβδομήκοντα φοίνικες κατὰ τὴν Γραφήν, νυνὶ δὲ τῷ χρόνῳ πλεονάσαντες.”
34. Caner 2010, 153 no. 56.
35. Cosmas Indicopleustes 5.13–14: “Παρελθόντων οὖν τῶν Ἰσραηλιτῶν εἰς τò πέραν, εἰς τòν λεγόμενον Φοινικῶνα, ἤρξαντο βαδίζειν τὴν ἔρημον Σούρ, τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμέρας νεφέλην αὐτοῖς εἰς σκέπην διαπεταννύντος ἀπò τοῦ καύσωνος τοῦ ἡλίου καὶ ὁδηγῶν αὐτοὺς ἐν αὐτῇ καὶ νυκτòς ἐν στύλῳ πυρòς φαίνων καὶ καθοδηγῶν αὐτοὺς πᾶσαν τὴν ἔρημον, καθὼς γέγραπται· ‘Διεπέτασε νεφέλην εἰς σκέπην αὐτοῖς καὶ πῦρ τοῦ φωτίσαι αὐτοῖς τὴν νύκτα.’ Ἔστιν οὖν καταγράψαι καὶ τοῦτο τοιῶσδε. Εἶτα πάλιν ὁδεύσαντες ἀπò τῆς Μερρᾶς ἦλθον εἰς Ἐλείμ.”
36. Diodorus Siculus 3.42. His account also contains fantastical features such as that the people make their beds in the trees because they are afraid of the wild beasts that live in the area. It may also be of interest that he mentions an altar and writing on the rocks that no one understood. He clearly associates these places with the Nabataeans and other Arabs who transported incense from southern Arabia to the Mediterranean Sea. This report suggests that the Nabataeans had settled the area before the first century C.E.: “ἑξῆς δὲ τοῦ μυχοῦ τόπος ἐστὶ παραθαλάττιος ὁ τιμώμενος ὑπò τῶν ἐγχωρίων διαφερόντως διὰ τὴν εὐχρηστίαν τὴν ἐξ αὐτοῦ. οὗτος δ’ ὀνομάζεται μὲν Φοινικών, ἔχει δὲ πλῆθος τούτου τοῦ φυτοῦ πολύκαρπον καθ’ ὑπερβολὴν καὶ πρòς ἀπόλαυσιν καὶ τρυφὴν διαφέρον. πᾶσα δ’ ἡ σύνεγγυς χώρα σπανίζει ναματιαίων ὑδάτων. . . . καὶ γὰρ ὕδατος οὐκ ὀλίγαι πηγαὶ καὶ λιβάδες ἐκπίπτουσιν ἐν αὐτῷ, ψυχρότητι χιόνος οὐδὲν λειπόμεναι· αὗται δ’ ἐφ’ ἑκάτερα τὰ μέρη τὰ κατὰ τὴν γῆν χλοερὰ ποιοῦσι καὶ παντελῶς ἐπιτερπῆ τòν τόπον. ἔστι δὲ καὶ βωμòς ἐκ στερεοῦ λίθου παλαιòς τοῖς χρόνοις, ἐπιγραφὴν ἔχων ἀρχαίοις γράμμασιν ἀγνώστοις. ἐπιμέλονται δὲ τοῦ τεμένους ἀνὴρ καὶ γυνή, διὰ βίου τὴν ἱερωσύνην ἔχοντες. μακρόβιοι δ’ εἰσὶν οἱ τῇδε κατοικοῦντες, καὶ τὰς κοίτας ἐπὶ τῶν δένδρων ἔχουσι διὰ τòν ἀπò τῶν θηρίων φόβον. παραπλεύσαντι δὲ τòν Φοινικῶνα πρòς ἀκρωτηρίῳ τῆς ἠπείρου νῆσός ἐστιν ἀπò τῶν ἐναυλιζομένων ἐν αὐτῇ ζῴων Φωκῶν νῆσος ὀνομαζομένη· τοσοῦτο γὰρ πλῆθος τῶν θηρίων τούτων ἐνδιατρίβει τοῖς τόποις ὥστε θαυμάζειν τοὺς ἰδόντας. τò δὲ προκείμενον ἀκρωτήριον τῆς νήσου κεῖται κατὰ τὴν καλουμένην Πέτραν καὶ τὴν Παλαιστίνην τῆς Ἀραβίας· εἰς γὰρ ταύτην τόν τε λίβανον καὶ τἄλλα φορτία τὰ πρòς εὐωδίαν ἀνήκοντα κατάγουσιν, ὡς λόγος, ἐκ τῆς ἄνω λεγομένης Ἀραβίας οἵ τε Γερραῖοι καὶ Μιναῖοι.”
37. Cosmas Indicopleustes 5.14: “ἔνθα καὶ πρώτως ἐσαββάτισαν κατὰ τὰς ἐντολάς, ἃς δέδωκεν ὁ Θεòς τῷ Μωϋσῇ ἀγράφως ἐν Μερρα.”
38. Both use the word ἐντολή (order, commandment). Exodus 15.26: “καὶ εἶπεν, ‘Ἐὰν ἀκοῇ ἀκούσῃς τῆς φωνῆς κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ σου καὶ τὰ ἀρεστὰ ἐναντίον αὐτοῦ ποιήσῃς καὶ ἐνωτίσῃ ταῖς ἐντολαῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ φυλάξῃς πάντα τὰ δικαιώματα αὐτοῦ, πᾶσαν νόσον, ἣν ἐπήγαγον τοῖς Αἰγυπτίοις, οὐκ ἐπάξω ἐπὶ σέ· ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμι κύριος ὁ ἰώμενός σε.’”
39. Solzbacher 1989, 160.
40. Cosmas Indicopleustes 5.14–5: “Εἶτα πάλιν ὁδεύσαντες ἀπò τῆς Μερρᾶς ἦλθον εἰς Ἐλείμ, ἣν νῦν καλοῦμεν Ῥαϊθοῦ, ἔνθα ἦσαν δεκαδύο πηγαὶ καὶ ἑβδομήκοντα στελέχη φοινίκων· αἱ μὲν πηγαὶ εἰσέτι καὶ νῦν σῴζονται, οἱ δὲ φοίνικες πολὺ πλείους ἐγένοντο. Ἕως δὲ τῶν ἐνταῦθα δεξιᾷ τὴν θάλασσαν εἶχον καὶ ἐξ εὐωνύμων τὴν ἔρημον· ἀπò δὲ τῶν ἐνταῦθα τὴν ἄνω ἐπὶ τò ὄρος βαδίζουσιν ὀπίσω λοιπòν τὴν θάλασσαν ἐάσαντες, τὰ πρόσω δὲ τὴν ἔρημον βαδίζοντες. Ἔνθα γενομένων ἀνὰ μέσον Ἐλεὶμ καὶ τοῦ Σιναίου ὄρους, ἐκεῖ κατελήλυθεν ἐπ’ αὐτοὺς τò μάννα· ἔνθα καὶ πρώτως ἐσαββάτισαν κατὰ τὰς ἐντολάς, ἃς δέδωκεν ὁ Θεòς τῷ Μωϋσῇ ἀγράφως ἐν Μερρᾷ. Ἔστιν οὖν καὶ ταῦτα διαγράψαι οὕτως. Καταντήσαντες ἐνταῦθα εἰς Ἐλεὶμ ἀπò τῆς Μερρᾶς καὶ πάλιν ὁδεύσαντες ἀνὰ μέσον Ἐλεὶμ καὶ τοῦ Σιναίου ὄρους εἰς τὴν ἔρημον, εἰς ἣν ἐκεῖ καὶ ὀρτυγομήτρα κατῆλθεν ἐπ’ αὐτοὺς εἰς ἑσπέραν καὶ εἰς τò πρωＢ τò μάννα· ἐκεῖ πάλιν ἤρξαντο πρῶτον σαββατίζειν, τοῦ μάννα διατηρουμένου ἀπò τῆς ἕκτης καὶ τοῦ σαββάτου, ἐν ἄλλῃ δὲ ἡμέρᾳ μὴ δυναμένου μεῖναι, ἀλλ’ ἐπόζοντος καὶ ἀφανιζομένου· καὶ διὰ τοῦτο διδασκόμενοι σαββατίζειν· ἠθέλησαν γάρ τινες καὶ τῷ σαββάτῳσυλλέξαι καὶ οὐχ εὗρον, καθὰ γέγραπται.”
41. Caner 2010, 249 no. 15.
42. Solzbacher 1989, 152, 160; Caner 2010, 261 no. 43.
43. Exodus 15:27; PP 41: “Exinde venimus in Sochot et exinde descendimus in Magdalum, etiam et ad locum ad LXXII palmas et XII fontes . . . in quo locum est castellum modicum, qui vocatur Surandala . . . Exinde uenimus ad locum, ubi filii Israhel transeuntes mare castra metati sunt . . . et inde uenimus ad locum ad ripam, ubi transierunt filii Israhel. Ubi exierunt de mare, est oratorium Heliae, et transcendentes in locum, ubi intrauerunt in mare, ibi est oratorium Moysi.” All the manuscripts attest the number seventy-two, which must be a mistake for seventy.
44. Another possibility is that one of the two accounts copied the other. Compare Ammonius Monachus, Relatio (CPA), fols. 10–11; (Greek) 8: “ἔνθα αἱ δώδεκα πηγαὶ καὶ οἱ ἑβδομήκοντα φοίνικες κατὰ τὴν Γραφήν, νυνὶ δὲ τῷ χρόνῳ πλεονάσαντες,” with Cosmas Indicopleustes 5.14, “ἣν νῦν καλοῦμεν Ῥαϊθοῦ, ἔνθα ἦσαν δεκαδύο πηγαὶ καὶ ἑβδομήκοντα στελέχη φοινίκων· αἱ μὲν πηγαὶ εἰσέτι καὶ νῦν σῴζονται, οἱ δὲ φοίνικες πολὺ πλείους ἐγένοντο.”
45. Egeria 3.4.
46. Exodus 17–18.
47. On the archaeology of Pharan, see Grossman 1984, 1992, 2000, 2001b; Grossman, Jones, and Reichert 1998.
48. Ammonius Monachus, Relatio (Greek) 14.
49. On Pharan, see Dahari 2000, 15–20.
50. For more on this topic, see below and chapter 1, pp. 25–27.
51. Exodus 17:8–16; Eusebius, Onomasticon 142.22–25.
52. Exodus 17:5–6.
53. Eusebius, Onomasticon 166.12–17: “πόλις ἐστὶν ὑπὲρ τὴν Ἀραβίαν, παρακειμένη τοῖς ἐπὶ τῆς ἐρήμου Σαρακηνοῖς, δι’ ἧς ὥδευσαν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραήλ, ἀπάραντες ἀπò Σινᾶ. κεῖται δὲ καὶ ἐπέκεινα τῆς Ἀραβίας ἐπὶ νότον, ἀπέχει δὲ Ἀϊλὰ πρòς ἀνατολὰς ὁδòν τριῶν ἡμερῶν, οὗ, φησὶν ἡ γραφή, κατῴκησεν Ἰσμαήλ, ὅθεν οἱ Ἰσμαηλῖται. λέγεται δὲ καὶ Χοδολλαγόμωρ κατασκῆψαι τοὺς ἐν τῇ ‘Φαράν, ἥ ἐστιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ.’”
54. Genesis 21:14–21.
55. This is stated most explicitly in Sozomen, Historia Ecclesiastica 6.37. Also see the discussion in chapter 1, pp. 27–28.
56. Shahid (1984a, 326) and Dahari (2000, 17–18) assume that the population of Pharan were “Saracens” and Arabs, possibly from a tribe connected to the Judham. An analysis of the morphology of skeletons buried outside the town of Pharan concluded that the bodies were those of Near Easterners, but the analysis could not determine whether the population was more related to modern Bedouin in the region or ancient dwellers of Palestine (Hershkovitz 1988).
57. Petrus Diaconus Y.15 (vv. 118–19): “Ibi appellatur locus ille Raphidin, ubi Hamalech occurrit filiis Israhel, et ubi murmurauit populus pro aqua, et ubi Iethro socer Moysi ei occurrit. Locus uero, ubi orauit Moyses, quando Iesus expugnauit Amalech, mos excelsus est ualde et erectus imminens super Pharan; ubi autem orauit Moyses, ecclesia nunc constructa est. Locus autem ipse, quem admodum sedit et quemadmodum lapides sub cubitu habuit, hodie parent. Ibi etiam Moyses deuicto Hamalech edificauit altare Domino. In tantum autem locus iste usque ad quingentos passus erectus est, hac si per parietem subeas.”
58. Egeria reports in 5.12 that monks at Mount Sinai showed her around the biblical sites there, and in 6.2 she mentions how the Pharanite guides navigated by desert markings. From this we can assume that she used locals as guides along her journeys, specifically inhabitants of Pharan when in the area. Wilkinson (1971, 18) notes that Egeria was “shown places which were hallowed by local tradition.”
59. Cosmas Indicopleustes 3.16; Psalms 78:15–16, 105:41. These verses clearly refer to the events at Raphidim. It is interesting that no other source mentions them in connection with the site.
60. Cosmas Indicopleustes 3.17; 1 Corinthians 10:4.
61. Cosmas Indicopleustes 3.18.
62. PP 40: “et venientes in Fara ciuitatem, ubi pugnauit Moyses cum Amalec, ubi est oratorium, cuius altare positum est super petras illas, quas subposuerunt Moysi oranti.” Caner 2010, 259 no. 37.
63. Exodus 18; PP 40: “Ipsa est terra Madian et ipsi inhabitantes in ea ciuitate dicitur, quia ex familia Iethro, soceri Moysi, descendunt.”
64. Ibid. 37: “Qui perambulantes per heremum octaua decima die venimus ad locum, ubi Moyses de petra eduxit aquas. Exinde alia die venimus ad montem dei Choreb, et inde mouentes, ut ascenderemus Sina. . . .”
65. Exodus 17:6: “ὅδε ἐγὼ ἕστηκα πρò τοῦ σὲ ἐκεῖ ἐπὶ τῆς πέτρας ἐν Χωρηβ· καὶ πατάξεις τὴν πέτραν, καὶ ἐξελεύσεται ἐξ αὐτῆς ὕδωρ, καὶ πίεται ὁ λαός μου. ἐποίησεν δὲ Μωυσῆς οὕτως ἐναντίον τῶν υἱῶν Ισραηλ.”
66. PP 40.
67. The Mount Sinai narrative is recorded in Exodus 19–34.
68. Eusebius, Onomasticon 172.9–10: “Χωρήβ—ὄρος τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν χώρᾳ Μαδιάμ. παράκειται τῷ ὄρει Σινᾶ ὑπὲρ τὴν Ἀραβίαν ἐπὶ τῆς ἐρήμου.”
69. Jerome, Onomasticon 173.9–10.
70. Eusebius, Onomasticon 144.1–4: “ὄρη ἐστὶ χρυσοῦ ψηγμάτων ἔμπλεα ἐπὶ τῆς ἐρήμου, ια‛ ἡμερῶν ὁδòν ἀπέχοντα τοῦ ὄρους Χωρήβ, παρ’ οἷς Μωϋσῆς τò Δευτερονόμιον γράφει. λέγεται δὲ ἐν Φαινὼν χαλκοῦ μετάλλοις τò παλαιòν παρακεῖσθαι ὄρη χρυσοῦ μετάλλων.”
71. Deuteronomy 1:1–2.
72. Jerome, Onomasticon 145.1–5; Eusebius, De Martyribus Palaestinae (Recensio Brevior) 7.2.
73. For example, Egeria 3.6: “lecto ergo ipso loco omni de libro Moysi.”
74. Ibid. 2.7: “hoc autem, ante quam perveniremus ad montem Dei, iam referentibus fratribus cognoueram, et postquam ibi perveni, ita esse manifeste cognoui.”
75. Ibid. 3.7: “tunc statim illi sancti dignati sunt singula ostendere. Nam ostenderunt nobis. . . .”
76. Exodus 32:16–20; Egeria 3.7: “nam ostenderunt nobis speluncam illam ubi fuit sanctus Moyses cum iterato ascendisset in montem Dei ut acciperet denuo tabulas, posteaquam priores illas fregerat peccante populo, et cetera loca, quaecumque desiderabamus vel quae ipsi melius noverant, dignati sunt ostendere nobis.”
77. 3 Kings 18:31–36; Egeria 4.2: “ostenditur etiam ibi altarium lapideum, quem posuit ipse sanctus Helias ad offerendum Deo, sicut et illi sancti nobis ostendere dignabantur.” Strangely, Elijah seems to have built the altar before he went to Mount Sinai.
78. Ibid. 4.3: “fecimus ergo et ibi oblationem et orationem impensissimam, et lectus est ipse locus de libro Regnorum.”
79. Exodus 32:7–8; Egeria 2.2.
80. Exodus 24:1–2; Egeria 4.4: “id est ad eum locum ubi steterat sanctus Aaron cum septuaginta senioribus cum sanctus Moyses acciperet a Domino legem ad filios Israhel. In eo ergo loco, licet et tectum non sit, tamen petra ingens est per girum, habens planitiem supra se, in qua stetisse dicuntur ipsi sancti; nam et in medio ibi quasi altarium de lapidibus factum habet.”
81. Ibid. 4.4: “lectus est ergo et ibi ipse locus de libro Moysi et dictus unus psalmus aptus loco.”
82. Ibid. 6.1. See Caner's notes (2010, 217–19) for a discussion of the modern locations she passed through to reach Mount Sinai from Pharan.
83. Egeria 2.2: “haec est autem vallis ingens et planissima in qua filii Israhel commorati sunt his diebus quod sanctus Moyses ascendit in montem Domini et fuit ibi quadraginta diebus et quadraginta noctibus.”
84. Exodus 3–4; Egeria 2.2: “haec ergo vallis ipsa est, in cuius capite ille locus est, ubi sanctus Moyses, cum pasceret pecora soceri sui, iterum locutus est ei Deus de rubo in igne.”
85. Ibid. 2.3: “id est ubi rubus erat. . . . itaque ergo hox placuit ut, visis omibus quae desiderabamus, descendentes a monte Dei, ubi est rubus veniremus.”
86. Ibid. 2.3: “rediremus ad iter cum hominibus Dei, qui nobis singula loca, quae scripta sunt, per ipsam vallem ostendebant.”
87. Ibid. 1.1: “mons sanctus Dei Syna.”
88. Caner (2010, 219 no. 51) notes that from her location, Mount Sinai would have looked smaller than Jabal Katarina. Egeria 2.5–6: “mons autem ipse per giro quidem unus esse videtur: intus autem quod ingrederis, plues sunt, sed totum mons Dei appellatur; specialis autem ille, in cuius summitate est hic locus, ubi descendit maiestas Dei, sicut scriptum est, in medio illorum omnium est. Et cum hi omnes, qui per girum sunt, tam excelsi sint quam nunquam me puto vidisse, tamen ipse ille medianus, in quo descendit maiestas Dei, tano altior est omnibus illis ut, cum subissemus in illo, prorsus toti illi montes, quos excelsos videramus, ita infra nos essent ac si colliculi permodici essent.”
89. Ibid. 3.7: “Egyptum autem et Palestinam et mare Rubrum et mare illut Parthenicum, quod mittit Alexandriam, nec non et fines Saracenorum infinitos ita subter nos inde videbamus, ut credi vix possit.” On the identification of the “mare Parthenicum,” see Caner 2010, 221 no. 67.
90. Ibid. 3.2: “hora ergo quarta pervenimus in summitatem illam montis Dei sancti Syna, ubi data est lex in eo, id est locum, ubi descendit maiestas Domini in ea die, qua mons fumigabat.”
91. Ibid. 3.5: “verum autem in ipsa summitate montis illius mediani nullus commanet; nichil enim est ibi aliud nisi sola ecclesia et spelunca, ubi fuit sanctus Moyses.” The cave is also mentioned by Theodoret, Historia Religiosa 2.13.
92. Caner (2010, 222 no. 69) believes this is modern Jabal Sufsafa.
93. Egeria 4.1: “completo ergo omni desiderio, quo festinaueramus ascendere, cepimus iam et descendere ab ipsa summitate montis Dei, in qua ascenderamus, in alio monte, qui ei periunctus est, qui locus appellatur in Choreb; ibi enim est ecclesia.” On Choreb, Exodus 17:6, which Egeria has already linked with Raphidim and Pharan. See Egeria, Itinerarium (ed. Maraval 1997), 138–39 no. 1.
94. Egeria 4.2: “nam hic est locus Choreb ubi fuit sanctus Helias propheta qua fugit a facie Achab Regis, ubi ei locutus est Deus dicens: ‘Quid tu hic, Helias?’ sicut scriptum est in libris Regnorum.” The Septuagint (1 Kings 19:9) reads, “Τί σὺ ἐνταῦθα,Ἠλίου;”
95. Egeria 4.6: “quoniam ibi errant monasteria plurima sanctorum hominum et ecclesia in eo loco ubi est rubus, qui rubus usque in hodie vivet et mittet virgultas.”
96. Exodus 3:2, 6; Egeria 4.7: “hic est autem rubus quem superius dixi, de quo locutus est Dominus Moysi in igne, qui est in eo loco ubi monasteria sunt plurima et ecclesia in capite vallis ipsius. Ante ipsam autem ecclesiam hortus est gratissimus, habens aquam optimam abundantem, in quo horto ipse rubus est.”
97. Ibid. 4.8: “locus etiam ostenditur ibi iuxta ubi stetit sanctus Moyses quando et dixit Deus, ‘Solve corrigiam calciamenti tui’ et cetera.” Ibid. 5.2: “nam in primo capite ipsius vallis ubi manseramus et videramus rubum illum de quo locutus est Deus sancto Moysi in igne, videramus etiam et illum locum in quo steterat ante rubum sanctus Moyses quando ei dixit Deus, ‘Solve corrigiam calciamenti tui; locus enim in quo stas terra sancta est.’”
98. Forsyth and Weitzmann 1973, pls. CXXVI–CXXVIII.
99. Exodus 3:5.
100. Forsyth and Weitzmann 1973, 15.
101. Egeria 5.3: “nam et monstraverunt locum ubi fuerunt casta filiorum Israhel his diebus quibus Moyses fuit in montem. Monstraverunt etiam locum ubi factus est vitulus ille, nam in eo loco fixus est usque in hodie lapis grandis.”
102. Ibid. 5.4: “de contra videbamus summitatem montis . . . de quo loco sanctus Moyses vidit filios Israhel habentes choros his diebus qua fecerant vitulum. Ostenderunt etaim petram ingentem in ipso loco ubi descendebat sanctus Moyses cum Iesu, filio Nave, ad quem petram iratus fregit tabulas quas afferebat.”
103. Ibid. 5.5–6: “ostenderunt etiam quemadmodum per ipsam vallem unusquisque eorum abitationes habuerant, de quibus abitationibus fuerunt lapide girata. Ostenderunt etiam locum ubi filios Israhel iussit currere sanctus Moyses ‘de porta in porta’ regressus ad montem. Item ostenderunt nobis locum ubi incensus est vitulus ipse, iubente sancto Moyse, quem fecerat eis Aaron.”
104. Ibid. 5.9: “haec est ergo vallis ubi celebrata est pascha, completo anno profectionis filiorum Israhel de terra Egypti, quoniam in ipsa valle filii Israhel commorati sunt aliquandiu, id est donec sanctus Moyses ascenderet in montem Dei et descenderet primum et iterato; et denuo tandiu ibi immorati sunt donec fieret tabernaculum et singula quae ostensa sunt in montem Dei. Nam ostensus est nobis et ille locus in quo confixum a Moyse est primitus tabernaculum et perfecta sunt singula quae iusserat Deus in montem Moysi ut fierent.”
105. Numbers 11:34; Egeria 5.10: “vidimus etiam in extrema iam valle ipsa Memorias concupiscentiae, in eo tamen loco in quo denuo reversi sumus ad iter nostrum.”
106. Exodus 17:6: “ὅδε ἐγὼ ἕστηκα πρò τοῦ σὲ ἐκεῖ ἐπὶ τῆς πέτρας ἐν Χωρηβ· καὶ πατάξεις τὴν πέτραν, καὶ ἐξελεύσεται ἐξ αὐτῆς ὕδωρ, καὶ πίεται ὁ λαός μου. ἐποίησεν δὲ Μωυσῆς οὕτως ἐναντίον τῶν υἱῶν Ισραηλ.” Egeria 5.6: “item ostenderunt torrentem illum de quo potavit sanctus Moyses fiolios Israhel, sicut scriptum est in Exodo.” It is possible, however, that this passage refers to the water that was used to put out the fire of the Golden Calf, which Moses made some of the people drink (Exodus 32:20). See Egeria, Itinerarium (ed. Maraval 1997), 147, and C. Weber 1994, 16–17.
107. Numbers 11:1–3. Egeria 5.7: “nam ostenderunt nobis etiam et illum locum qui appellatus est Incendium, quia incensa est quedam pars castrorum tunc qua, orante sancto Moyse, cessavit ignis.”
108. Exodus 16:13–15; Numbers 11:31–32. Egeria 5.7–8: “item ostenderunt locum ubi filii Israhel habuerunt concupiscentiam escarum. . . . Ostenderunt etiam et illum locum ubi eis pluit manna et coturnices.”
109. Numbers 11:25. Egeria 4.4. Also see Egeria 5.7: “ostenderunt etiam nobis locum ubi de spiritu Moysi acceperunt septuaginta viri.”
110. Procopius, De Aedificiis 5.8.1 (ed. Haury 1962): “καὶ ὄρος ἀπότομόν τε καὶ δεινῶς ἄγριον ἀποκρέμαται ἄγχιστά πη τῆς Ἐρυθρᾶς καλουμένης θαλάσσης, Σινὰ ὄνομα.”
111. Ibid. 5.8.7: “ἀνθρώπῳ γὰρ ἐν τῇ ἀκρωρείᾳ διανυκτερεύειν ἀμήχανά ἐστιν, ἐπεὶ κτύποι τε διηνεκὲς καὶ ἕτερα ἄττα θειότερα νύκτωρ ἀκούονται, δύναμίν τε καὶ γνώμην τὴν ἀνθρωπείαν ἐκπλήσσοντα.”
112. Ibid. 5.8.8: “ἐνταῦθά ποτε τòν Μωσέα φασὶ πρòς τοῦ θεοῦ τοὺς νόμους παραλαβόντα ἐξενεγκεῖν.”
113. Exodus 17:6: “ὅδε ἐγὼ ἕστηκα πρò τοῦ σὲ ἐκεῖ ἐπὶ τῆς πέτρας ἐν Χωρηβ· καὶ πατάξεις τὴν πέτραν, καὶ ἐξελεύσεται ἐξ αὐτῆς ὕδωρ, καὶ πίεται ὁ λαός μου. ἐποίησεν δὲ Μωυσῆς οὕτως ἐναντίον τῶν υἱῶν Ισραηλ.”
114. Caner (2010, 257 no. 23) notes that the Piacenza pilgrim does not mention seeing the Burning Bush, only a fountain.
115. For more on the construction of Saint Catherine's, see chapter 5, pp. 121–24. PP 37: “Et introducerunt nos in uallem inter Choreb et Sina, ad cuius pede montis est fons ille, ubi Moyses uidit signum rubi ardentis, in quo oues adaquabat. Qui fons inclusus est intra monasterium, quod monasterium circumdatum muris munitis. . . .”
116. Ibid.: “et ascendimus in monte continuo milia tria, et venimus ad locum ad speluncam, ubi absconditus fuit Helias, quando fugit ante Iezabel. Ante ipsa spelunca surgit fons, qui inrigat montem.”
117. Ibid.: “inde ascendimus milia continuo tria in summum cacumen montis, in quo est oratorium modicum, plus minus pedes sex in latitudine et in longitudine. In quo nullus praesumit manere, sed orto iam die ascendant monachi et faciunt opus dei.”
118. Ibid. 38: “Mons Sina petrosus, raro terram habet. In quo per circuitum cellulae multae seruorum dei et in Choreb similiter et dicunt esse Choreb terram mundam.”
119. Forsyth and Weitzmann 1973, 15.
120. Coleman and Elsner 1994, 81–84.
121. Cosmas Indicopleustes 5.53–54: “Λαβόντες δὲ καὶ παρὰ Θεοῦ τòν νόμον ἐγγράφως καὶ διδασκόμενοι γράμματα νεωστί, καὶ ὥσπερ παιδευτηρίῳ ἡσύχῳ τῇ ἐρήμῳ χρησάμενος ὁ Θεòς τεσσαράκοντα ἔτη εἴασεν αὐτοὺς καταλαξεῦσαι τὰ γράμματα. Ὅθεν ἔστιν ἰδεῖν ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἐρήμῳ, λέγω δὴ τοῦ Σιναΐου ὄρους, ἐν πάσαις ταῖς καταπαύσεσι πάντας τοὺς λίθους τῶν αὐτόθι, τοὺς ἐκ τῶν ὀρέων ἀποκλωμένους, γεγραμμένους γράμμασι γλυπτοῖς ἑβραϊκοῖς, ὡς αὐτòς ἐγὼ πεζεύσας τοὺς τόπους μαρτυρῶ. Ἅτινα καί τινες Ἰουδαῖοι ἀναγνόντες διηγοῦντο ἡμῖν λέγοντες γεγράφθαι οὕτως· ‘Ἄπαρσις τοῦδε, ἐκ φυλῆς τῆσδε, ἔτει τῷδε, μηνὶ τῷδε,’ καθὰ καὶ παρ’ ἡμῖν πολλάκις τινὲς ἐν ταῖς ξενίαις γράφουσιν. Αὐτοὶ δὲ καί, ὡς νεωστὶ μαθόντες γράμματα, συνεχῶς ατεχρῶντο καὶ ἐπλήθυνον γράφοντες, ὥστε πάντας τοὺς τόπους ἐκείνους μεστοὺς εἶναι γραμμάτων ἑβραϊκῶν γλυπτῶν εἰσέτι καὶ νῦν σῳζομένων διὰ τοὺς ἀπίστους, ὡς ἔγωγε οἶμαι. Ἐξòν δὲ τῷ βουλομένῳ ἐν τοῖς τόποις γενέσθαι καὶ θεάσασθαι, ἤγουν ἐρωτῆσαι καὶ μαθεῖν περὶ τούτου ὡς ἀλήθειαν εἴπαμεν. Πρώτως οὖν Ἑβραῖοι παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ σοφισθέντες καὶ γράμματα διὰ τῶν λιθίνων πλακῶν ἐκείνων παραλαβόντες καὶ μεμαθηκότες τεσσαράκοντα ἔτη ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ γειτνιῶσι τοῖς Φοίνιξι παραδεδώκασι κατ’ ἐκεῖνο καιροῦ, πρώτῳ Κάδμῳ τῷ Τυρίων βασιλεῖ, ἐξ ἐκείνου παρέλαβον Ἕλληνες, λοιπòν καθεξῆς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη.”
122. Markus 1990, 151–52, comments on the role of pilgrims in spreading the ideology of holy places throughout the empire.