Biblical Archaeology Review

Malka Hershkovitz, “A Roman Cupping Vessel from Masada,” Eretz Israel 20, Jerusalem (1989), pp. 275–277 (in Hebrew; English summary pp. 204*–205*).

Amnon Ben-Tor, Back to Masada (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society and Washington, DC: Biblical Archaeology Society, 2009), p. 176.

“Ten Questions with a Torah/Bible Scholar: Prof. Jacob L. Wright,” TheTorah.com (http://thetorah.com/ten-questions-jacob-wright/).

Karen L. King, “The Place of the Gospel of Philip in the Context of Early Christian Claims About Jesus’ Marital Status,” New Testament Studies 59 (2013), pp. 565–587.

Leo Steinberg, The Sexuality of Christ in Renaissance Art and in Modern Oblivion (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1983).

For these functions, as well as the various anthropological models presented here, see Richard Fox, Urban Anthropology: Cities in Their Cultural Settings (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1977).

For a more detailed discussion of the Lamech legend and other ways that interpreters changed the story, see my Cain and Abel in Text and Tradition: Jewish and Christian Interpretations of the First Sibling Rivalry, Themes in Biblical Narrative 14 (Leiden: Brill, 2011).

In Genesis 4:23, Lamech boasts “I have killed a man for wounding me, a young man for striking me.” Modern commentators view this statement as an example of Hebrew parallelism rather than a claim by Lamech to have killed two separate people. But ancient interpreters often understood the verse to mean that Lamech killed both Cain and a younger son.

Book of Wisdom 10:3–4; Testament of Adam 3:5; Augustine, City of God 15.20; Genesis Rabbah 22:12; Ecclesiastes Rabbah 6:2; Pirqe de-Rabbi Eliezer 30.

A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, vol. 1, Prepared with an Introduction and Index by Robert H. Eisenman and James M. Robinson (Washington, DC: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1991), p. xi.