E. Dr. A. Dedekind’s Contribution to the Study of the Identification of the Species Productive of Tekhelet and Argaman Respectively

It has fallen to Dr. Dedekind to press Lacaze-Duthiers’ far-reaching results into the service of Semitic porphyrology. 

Dr. Dedekind has since maintained that Lacaze-Duthiers’ researches have once for all furnished the clue to the identification of the species used for Tekhelet and Argaman respectively. In the fourth volume of his Beitrag² in the course of a criticism of George Tryon’s references to ancient purple, Dr. Dedekind gives the following classification:

Pupura lapillus, Murex erinaceus, Murex trunculus = gehören zur Purpursorte Tekhelet (d.i. violetter oder blauer Purpur) (belongs to the purple variety Tekhelet (i.e. purple or blue purple) )

Murex brandaris, Purpura haemastoma =  gehören zur Purpursorte Argaman (d.i. roter oder karminer Purpur) (belongs to the purple variety Argaman (i.e. red or carmine purple) )

In a private communication to me last summer, the learned author, while commenting on a series of notes on תכלת I had forwarded to him, insisted with as much emphasis as ever upon the identification of the Tekhelet-species with Murex trunculus and of the Argaman species with Murex brandaris and Purpura haemastoma. He also mentioned Murex erinaceus as a possible identification with the Tekhelet species, adding, however, that in view of the minuteness of the dye-secretion of the species its employ-ment for dyeing was unlikely. Was Dr. Dedekind’s omission of Purpura lapillus in the above communication due to the fact of that species being non-Mediterranean?

The identification adopted by Dr. Dedekind, be it carefully noted, is based solely upon the tradition of the Tekhelet-nuance: It takes no note of the description of the Tekhelet–hillazon as given in the Talmud and as reproduced by Maimonides. Tekhelet according to some was blue, according to others dark violet playing into bluish; Murex trunculus, Dr. Dedekind affirms, is capable of producing both blue³ and dark violet playing into blue, but the latter is the usual result of the development of the pigment of that species. The species known to have been employed in Phoenician purple dyeing are Murex trunculus. Murex brandaris and Purpura haemastoma.

There can be no question about the identification of the Tekhelet species. Whether Tekhelet denotes the former or the latter colour or covers both, Murex trunculus is the only possible solution out of the three species just named. There is of course the possibility that Tekhelet was produced from a fourth species not yet identified. Gaillardot⁴ on whose authority it is asserted that remains of shells of Murex brandaris and Purpura haemastoma have been found about Saida bearing internal evidence of their employment in dyeing really never asserted that no others had been discovered. From the fact, however, that the one mass consists exclusively of Murex trunculus shells while in the other Murex brandaris and Purpura haemastoma are found together it may be inferred that the latter is composed entirely of shells of species furnishing colours homogeneous with that obtained from Murex brandaris and Purpura haemastoma that is Argaman rather than Tekhelet.

The possibility of identifying the Tekhelet-mollusc with some indeterminate species other than M. trunculus is thus reduced to a minimum, though it is not entirely excluded, for it is possible that the remains of the Tekhelet shells on the Phoenician coast have somehow disappeared, or that the shells being utilized for some purpose were not allowed to accumulate in the manner of those of Murex trunculus, etc….

There is of course a distinct relationship between the determination of the exact Tekhelet colour and the identification of the species furnishing the Tekhelet-dye.

If, as Baehr⁵ contends, Tekhelet was a pure dark blue to the exclusion of violet, then the claims of Murex trunculus will require some propping before they can be urged with unmixed confidence. The chemical constitution of the purpurigenic matter secreted by that species also includes an element of red, necessitating a violet shade in the final development. The question will be dealt with elsewhere; here it can only be touched upon. Dr. Dedekind in one of his letters to me says with reference to certain statements made by me in connection with the subject: 

In another communication the learned prophyrologist points to those designs as illustrating the Talmudic statement that Tekhelet is like unto the sky. The colour, however, of those “imbibierte Stellen” (“imbibed places”) is light sky blue (helles Himmelblau), not dark sky blue which is the colour of the cloudless Palestinian sky in bright sunshine but this is an objection of very little force. The phenomen presented by those sky blue spots is, however, hardly comprehensive enough to satisfy the view advocating a pure blue for Tekhelet, that the Murex trunculus may be accepted without further ado as the Tekhelet-species. The sky-blue colouring in question is due to infiltration and the instability of the matter.⁶ Cf. Lacaze-Duthier’s statement with reference to the designs with pigment of Purpura lapillus.