DOCSLIB.ORG

Hazor, Dor and Megiddo in the Time of Ahab and Under Assyrian Rule Author(S): EPHRAIM STERN Source: Israel Exploration Journal, Vol

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hazor, Dor and Megiddo in the Time of Ahab and Under Assyrian Rule Author(S): EPHRAIM STERN Source: Israel Exploration Journal, Vol Hazor, Dor and Megiddo in the Time of Ahab and under Assyrian Rule Author(s): EPHRAIM STERN Source: Israel Exploration Journal, Vol. 40, No. 1 (1990), pp. 12-30 Published by: Israel Exploration Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27926166 Accessed: 20-10-2017 06:56 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Israel Exploration Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Israel Exploration Journal This content downloaded from 109.67.249.19 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 06:56:20 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Hazor, Dor and Megiddo in the Time of Ahab and under Assyrian Rule* EPHRAIM STERN Institute of Archaeology The Hebrew University of Jerusalem INTRODUCTION IN the early 1960s, shortly after the publication of his well-known article, 'Hazor, Gezer and Megiddo in Solomon's Time',1 the late Y. Yadin advised me to undertake an examination of the fortifications and gates of Palestine as the subject of my master's thesis. After completing it, I published some of my conclusions on the Iron Age gates,2 to which I now return after excavating two gates at Dor. In his article Yadin argued that since at Hazor, in the tenth century B.C.E. Stratum X, a six-chambered gate had been found, which was identical in its dimensions and plan to the gate found at Megiddo and was also similar to the gate unearthed by Macalister at Gezer, this was conclusive evidence that the three gates had been built by Solomon, in full agreement with the statement in 1 Kings 9:15. For some reason, no later Iron Age gates were discovered or excavated at Hazor. 'Solomon's Gate' was the only one unearthed there, even though other fortifications and public buildings were uncovered ? notably, the walls, fortress, storerooms and water system ? attributed to later kings. Yadin was thus forced to establish the sequence of the development of Iron Age gates mainly on the basis of changes in the plans of the gates at Megiddo. These evolved from a gate of six chambers to one of four chambers, and lastly to one of two chambers.3 The stratigraphy and chronology of the Solomonic Gate at Hazor are generally accepted, and the examination of the six-chambered gate at Gezer by the Hebrew Union College expedition under the direction of W. Dever4 seems to confirm the chronological basis of Yadin's hypothesis. (Only the date of Gezer's Outer Gate has * A longer version of this article was originally published in Hebrew in El 20 (1989), pp. 233-248. 1 In A. Maiamat (ed.): The Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, Jerusalem, 1961, pp. 66-109 (Hebrew, English summary, p. xi); and cf. also idem, Hazor ? The Head of All Those Kingdoms (The Schweich Lectures of the British Academy, 1970), London, 1972, pp. 147-164. 2 See E. Stern: The Fortified City Gate and the Struggle for It Under the Monarchy, in J. Liver (ed.): The Military History of the Land of Israel in Biblical Times, Jerusalem, 1964, pp. 400-409 (Hebrew). 3 See Y. Yadin: Megiddo of the Kings of Israel, A 33 (1970), pp. 73-79; idem, Megiddo, Notes and News, IEJ 16 (1966), pp. 278-280; ibid. 17 (1967), pp. 119-121; ibid. 22 (1972), pp. 161-164. 4 Cf. also Y. Yadin: Solomon's City Wall and Gate at Gezer, IEJ 8 (1958), pp. 80-86; W.G. Dever: Further Excavations at Gezer, BA 34 (1971), pp. 112-120, Fig. 8. This content downloaded from 109.67.249.19 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 06:56:20 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms HAZOR, DOR AND MEGIDDO 13 been called into question.)5 Megiddo thus remains the only site which is a constant object of dispute as to its building phases in the period of the Monarchy. Unlike Hazor and Gezer, at Megiddo it was impossible to carry out new excavations in the area of the gates. Yadin, who was fully aware of the fact that the most effective way to re-examine the results of an old excavation is to conduct new excavations, did what was possible under the circumstances. Instead of re-interpreting the results of the original excavators, as others had done before him, he performed what he called a 'post-mortem' on the mound of Megiddo.6 Indeed, the conclusions of this excavation, which are well-known to all those interested in the subject, and to which he repeatedly turned in his writings,7 indicated that the Iron Age fortifications of Megiddo should be classified as follows: Stratum VA-IVB = Six-chambered gate and casemate wall (Solomonic period) Stratum IVA1 = Six-chambered gate and offset-inset wall (time of Jeroboam I) Stratum IV = Four-chambered gate and offset-inset wall (time of Ahab) Stratum III = Two-chambered gate and offset-inset wall (period of Assyrian rule) Strata II-I = Unfortified settlement with fortress (Babylonian Persian period) These conclusions were based on a careful and meticulous stratigraphie excavation whose results were substantiated by numerous finds. They were also later verified by Y. Shiloh, who carried out a fresh examination of the plans, records and photographs prepared by the earlier excavators and kept in the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.8 Unfortunately, the gatehouse proper and the walls associated with it could not be excavated anew by Yadin. The only evidence available for them was contained in the final excavation report and also in the field diaries, in which the American excavators had recorded various incidental remarks and other personal impressions. Several other archaeologists also stepped into this breach ? Z. Herzog and Y. Aharoni, for example9 ? who arrived at different conclusions, on the basis of the same evidence. 5 See . Herzog: The City Gate in Eret Israel and its Neighbouring Countries, Tel Aviv, 1976, pp. 125-129 (Hebrew, English summary); A. Zertal: The Gates of Gezer, El 15 (1981), pp. 222-228 (Hebrew); I. Finkelstein: The Date of the Gezer Outer Wall, Tel Aviv 8 (1981), pp. 136-145. 6 Cf. Y. Yadin: Hazor ? The Rediscovery of a Great Citadel of the Bible, New York, 1973. 7 Cf. above, nn. 3 and 6, and also Yadin (above, n. 1, 1972), pp. 147-164; idem (above, n. 6). 8 See Y. Shiloh: Solomon's Gate at Megiddo as Recorded by Its Excavator, R. Lamon, Chicago, Levant 12 (1980), pp. 69-76. 9 See Herzog (above, n. 5), pp. 102-118; Y. Aharoni: The Archaeology of the Land of Israel, Philadelphia, 1982, pp. 200-211; idem, The Stratification of Israelite Megiddo, JNES 31 (1972), pp. 302-311. This content downloaded from 109.67.249.19 on Fri, 20 Oct 2017 06:56:20 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 14 EPHRAIM STERN They maintained that during the course of Stratum VA (which they dated to the time of David and not of Solomon), the fortifications of the city consisted of a series of interconnected buildings which were constructed along the periphery of the mound. Only in Stratum IVB was the six-chambered gate erected, which from the outset was attached to an offset-inset wall. Nevertheless, aside from the argument about the walls, there was general agreement that the six-chambered gate dated to the time of Solomon, the four-chambered gate (Stratum IVA) to the time of Ahab and that the two-chambered gate of Stratum III belonged to the period of Assyrian rule. A totally different interpretation was recently proposed by D. Ussishkin, based on nearly the same records and photographs. Ussishkin, in his explanation of the evidence, maintained that although it is true that Stratum VA-IVB dates from the time of Solomon, the fortifications of this stratum were created by the row of peripheral structures, whereas the six-chambered gate and the offset-inset wall associated with it date from the time of Ahab.10 Since it is possible, on the basis of the same facts and records, to arrive at 10 See D. Ussishkin: Was the 'Solomonic' City Gate at Megiddo Built by King Solomon? BASOR 239 (1981), pp. 1-18. Yadin had already demonstrated that the suggested date of Lachish's six-chambered gate was in question here, and he also answered him in a cogent article ? Y. Yadin A Rejoinder, ibid., pp. 19-23. I would not have broached this subject if Ussishkin had not resumed this controversy in his second excavation report of Lachish, which appeared after Yadin had published his rejoinder. See D. Ussishkin: Excavations at Tel Lachish, 1978-1983: Second Preliminary Report, Tel Aviv 10 (1983), pp. 97-108. Ussishkin suggested there that the six-chambered gate at Lachish was constructed by Asa or Jehoshaphat in the ninth century B.C.E. (cf. his article in Qadmoniot 15 [1982], pp. 42-56 [Hebrew]), and as far as I can gather, he gives two reasons for this: 1. The archaeological evidence does not provide any clues as to the date and circumstances of the construction of the Level IV city'(7eMvzv, p. 171); 2.V. Fritz (following others) recently again assigned the list of Rehoboam's fortresses in Judah, among them Lachish, to the time of Josiah.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Israelon an Amazing Journey To
    Join Rabbi Latz, Michael Simon, Noa & Liat and Shir Tikvah Congregation ISRAELon an amazing journey to THIS AMAZING TOUR INCLUDES: June 17 - 29, 2014 2 nights at the Beresheet resort in Mitzpe Ramon 4 nights at the Dan Panorama Hotel in Jerusalem HIGHLIGHTS INCLUDE: 2 nights at the Dan Panorama Hotel in Tel Aviv Bar Mitzvah ceremony on Masada 2 nights at Kibbutz HaGoshrim in The Galilee Explore Jerusalem’s Old City All touring in a deluxe air-conditioned motorcoach Fulfill the Mitzvah of Gleaning the Fields for the needy with an English-speaking guide with Project Leket Breakfast daily Enjoy Bedouin Hospitality 2 dinners in Mitzpe Ramon Participate in an archeological dig Shabbat dinner in Jerusalem See a moving performance at the Nalaga’at Theater Bedouin Coffee and tea ceremony and Camel ride Dinner and meeting with Palestinians through ICCI Kayak on the Jordan River Kakadu art studio, workshop and lunch Make chocolate in Ein Zivan 2 dinners, including Shabbat dinner in the North Go back in time at Neot Kedumim Biblical Landscape Farewell dinner in Tel Aviv Preserve Group transfers and airport assistance upon Learn about desert Eco farming at Kibbutz Lotan arrival and departure Explore Masada Entrance fees per itinerary Float in the Dead Sea Porterage Make a moving visit to Yad Vashem … AND SO MUCH MORE! $3,089.00 Land Only Per person, based on double occupancy REGISTER ON-LINE: Airfare available 11 months prior to departure www.ayelet.com/LatzJune14.aspx 19 Aviation Rd. * Albany, NY 12205 * www.ayelet.com (800) 237-1517 * (518) 783-6001 * FAX (518) 783-6003 FIND OUT MORE AND REGISTER ON-LINE AT www.ayelet.com/LatzJune14.aspx Day 1- Tuesday, June 17, 2014: DEPARTURE We depart the Leichman leads the kids on a walk.
    [Show full text]
  • Malta and Gozo - Experiences of a Study Tour from 14Th to 21St September 2019 Text and Photos: Hans-Rudolf Neumann
    Malta and Gozo - Experiences of a study tour from 14th to 21st September 2019 Text and Photos: Hans-Rudolf Neumann Saturday, 14th September 2019 The morning flight from Berlin via Frankfurt Main to Malta with Lufthansa ran without any incidents. But check-in service in Berlin leaves a lot to be desired; the transition to digital full automation to reduce staff provoked the oppo- site effect. Luggage check-in and boarding on two different ends of the airport caused anno- yance, while during boarding two flights were serviced on the same counter. One two Warsaw and one to Frankfurt Main – the line on luggage security was more than 200 people and it was safe to ask the pilot again if this is the right plane when entering the plane. The on-board meal on the flight to Frankfurt consisted of a 30 g al- mond tartlet of a 65 mm size and a drink, on the connecting flight to Malta we had a honey nut bar and another drink. Regarding that you had to leave the house at 4.45 am and entered the hotel in Malta around 12.40 pm, it was a re- Fig. 01: First group photo on the first day of the ex- markable performance, particularly as there was cursion: an INTERFEST study group with their no time to buy additional food in Frankfurt due wives and guests at the foot of the St. Michael bas- to the short connection time. There were better tion of the landfront in La Valletta under the um- times! Anyways, the dinner together at Hotel brella of the European cultural route FORTE CUL- Bay View in Sliema offered a rich buffet inclu- TURA®.
    [Show full text]
  • New Early Eighth-Century B.C. Earthquake Evidence at Tel Gezer: Archaeological, Geological, and Literary Indications and Correlations
    Andrews University Digital Commons @ Andrews University Master's Theses Graduate Research 1992 New Early Eighth-century B.C. Earthquake Evidence at Tel Gezer: Archaeological, Geological, and Literary Indications and Correlations Michael Gerald Hasel Andrews University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/theses Recommended Citation Hasel, Michael Gerald, "New Early Eighth-century B.C. Earthquake Evidence at Tel Gezer: Archaeological, Geological, and Literary Indications and Correlations" (1992). Master's Theses. 41. https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/theses/41 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Research at Digital Commons @ Andrews University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Andrews University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Thank you for your interest in the Andrews University Digital Library of Dissertations and Theses. Please honor the copyright of this document by not duplicating or distributing additional copies in any form without the author’s express written permission. Thanks for your cooperation. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Brochure
    SPONSOR • Tandy Institute for Archaeology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary CONSORTIUM MEMBERS TEL GEZER • Ashland Theological Seminary Tel Gezer is a 33-acre site located on the • Clear Creek Baptist College • Emmaus Bible College western flank of the foothills of Judah, • Lancaster Bible College and Graduate School overlooking the coastal plain of Israel. It is gezer • Lycoming College strategically located at an important crossroad • Marian Eakins Archaeological Museum guarding the pass from the coast up to PROJECT Jerusalem. The ancient city is mentioned in SUPPORTING INSTITUTIONS several Egyptian and Assyrian texts. Gezer is • The Gezer Regional Council mentioned in the biblical account of Solomon’s • Israel Nature and National Parks Protection fortifications (1 Kings 9:15). It was continuously Authority occupied from the Bronze Age to the Hellenistic Period. AFFILIATED WITH the American Schools of Oriental Research YOU’RE INVITED TO JOIN THE TEAM! Although previous excavations have revealed For more information about much of Gezer’s history, there are still many participating in this excavation go to questions left unresolved that are key to the reconstruction of ancient Palestine. The 2015 season will focus on excavating two major www.telgezer.com strata, each representing a major period in the history of Gezer. The first is the Iron Age IIA city associated with Solomon where a large CONTACT INFORMATION administrative courtyard with adjoining rooms Dr. Steve Ortiz was revealed in 2014. This city was destroyed Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in a major conflagration associated with the P.O. Box 22308 • Fort Worth, TX 76122-0308 campaign of pharaoh Shishak. In addition, the [email protected] • 817-923-1921 ext.
    [Show full text]
  • Innocent Blood — Part One
    ONE SESSION SESSION INNOCENT BLOOD — PART ONE Tel Megiddo, where this session was filmed, is located at a strategic mountain pass overlooking the Plain of Jezreel, which made the city of Megiddo one of the most important cities in ancient Israel. The Via Maris, the main trade route between the dominant world pow- ers of the day — Egypt and the Mesopotamian empires of Assyria, Babylon, and Persia — crossed the mountains at Megiddo. So who- ever controlled the city could exert great power over world trade and have significant influence over world culture. In fact, the Via Maris was one source of Solomon’s wealth because God gave him the political might to control the key cities along that trade route — Hazor, Gezer, and of course Megiddo. Some scholars believe that because of Megiddo’s strategic location more battles have been fought in the Jezreel Valley below it than in any other place in the world. But in the context of the Bible, Megiddo repre- sents more than political control, more than economic and cultural influence. It also represents the battle for spiritual control of the minds and hearts of people — the ongoing battle between good and evil. That battle was waged when the people of ancient Israel lived in the land, it continues to this day, and it will culminate in the bat- tle of Har Megiddo, or Armageddon. So let’s take a closer look at the significance of Tel Megiddo. Centuries before the Israelites settled in the Promised Land (from about 2950 – 2350 BC), Megiddo was a prominent “high place” where the p eople of Canaan worshiped their fertility god, Baal, and his supposed mistress, Asherah.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Conquests of Canaan
    ÅA Wars in the Middle East are almost an every day part of Eero Junkkaala:of Three Canaan Conquests our lives, and undeniably the history of war in this area is very long indeed. This study examines three such wars, all of which were directed against the Land of Canaan. Two campaigns were conducted by Egyptian Pharaohs and one by the Israelites. The question considered being Eero Junkkaala whether or not these wars really took place. This study gives one methodological viewpoint to answer this ques- tion. The author studies the archaeology of all the geo- Three Conquests of Canaan graphical sites mentioned in the lists of Thutmosis III and A Comparative Study of Two Egyptian Military Campaigns and Shishak and compares them with the cities mentioned in Joshua 10-12 in the Light of Recent Archaeological Evidence the Conquest stories in the Book of Joshua. Altogether 116 sites were studied, and the com- parison between the texts and the archaeological results offered a possibility of establishing whether the cities mentioned, in the sources in question, were inhabited, and, furthermore, might have been destroyed during the time of the Pharaohs and the biblical settlement pe- riod. Despite the nature of the two written sources being so very different it was possible to make a comparative study. This study gives a fresh view on the fierce discus- sion concerning the emergence of the Israelites. It also challenges both Egyptological and biblical studies to use the written texts and the archaeological material togeth- er so that they are not so separated from each other, as is often the case.
    [Show full text]
  • Building the Temple of Salomo in the Early Medieval „Alamannia“
    Journal of Liberal Arts and Humanities (JLAH) Issue: Vol. 1; No. 4; April 2020 pp. 163-185 ISSN 2690-070X (Print) 2690-0718 (Online) Website: www.jlahnet.com E-mail: [email protected] Building the Temple of Salomo in the Early Medieval „Alamannia“ Dr. Thomas Kuentzel M.A. Untere Masch Strasse 16 Germany, 37073 Goettingen E-mail: [email protected] The diocese of Constance is one of the largest north of the Alps, reaching from the Lakes of Thun and Brienz down to Stuttgart and Ulm, from the river Iller (passing Kempten) to the Rhine near Lörrach and Freiburg. Its origins date back to the end of the 6th century; when saint Gall came to the duke of Alamannia, Gunzo, around the year 613, the duke promised him the episcopate, if he would cure his doughter.i In the 9th century some of the bishops also were abbots of the monasteries on the Island Reichenau and of Saint Gall. Three of the bishops were called Salomon, one being the uncle of the following.ii The noble family they belonged to is not known, but they possessed land on the southern shore of Lake Constance, in the province of Thurgau. Salomon III. was educated in the monastery of Saint Gall, and prepared especially for the episcopate. Maybe his uncle and granduncle also benefitted from such an education. Even their predecessor, bishop Wolfleoz, started his career as monk in Saint Gall. It is likely that the three Salomons were given their names with the wish, that they once would gain this office.
    [Show full text]
  • Observations on 666 in the Old Testament
    University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Engineering and Information Faculty of Informatics - Papers (Archive) Sciences 6-1999 Observations on 666 in the Old Testament M. G. Michael University of Wollongong, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/infopapers Part of the Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Michael, M. G.: Observations on 666 in the Old Testament 1999. https://ro.uow.edu.au/infopapers/672 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Observations on 666 in the Old Testament Disciplines Physical Sciences and Mathematics Publication Details This article was originally published as Michael, MG, Observations on 666 in the Old Testament, Bulletin of Biblical Studies, 18, January-June 1999, 33-39. This journal article is available at Research Online: https://ro.uow.edu.au/infopapers/672 RULLeTIN OF RIRLICkL STuDies Vol. 18, January - June 1999, Year 28 CONTENTS Prof. George Rigopoulos, ...~ Obituary for Oscar Cullmann 5 .., Prof. Savas Agourides, The Papables of Preparedness in Matthew's Gospel 18 Michael G. Michael, Observations on 666 in the Old Testament. 33 Prof. George Rigopoulos, Jesus and the Greeks (Exegetical Approach of In. 12,20-26) (Part B'). .. 40 Zoltan Hamar, Grace more immovable than the mountains 53 Raymond Goharghi, The land of Geshen in Egypt. The Ixos 99 Bookreviews: Prof. S. Agourides: Jose Saramagu, The Gospel according to Jesus - Karen Armstrong, In the Beginning, A new Interpretation ojthe Book ojGenesis ; 132 EDITIONS «ARTOS ZOES» ATHENS RULLeTIN OF RIRLIC~L STuDies Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • A. India and the Old Testament
    CHAPTER SEVEN INDIA AND THE WEST IN ANTIQUITY Geographically speaking, the terms "Asia," "East," and "India" were imprecise in the European imagination of antiquity. Before the age of the great discoveries, these terms were used so interchangeably that Egypt was sometimes pictured in maps as situated in Asia, which stood as a synonym for India.1 Sometimes Parthia included India as well. This means that when Matthew speaks about the magi from the East, it is possible that he means India; so also when the Acts of the Apostles describes the nationalities of the God-fearing Jews who were in Jerusalem for the Pentecost, he probably includes Indians among the people from Asia and Parthia (Acts 2:9-10). In spite of their lack of scientific knowledge of India, educated people in antiquity knew a great deal about the land and its people. A. India and the Old Testament India is mentioned in Esther 1:1 and 8:9 as the eastern boundary of the Persian Empire under Ahasuerus (c. fifth century B.C.) and in 1 Maccabees 6:37 in a reference to the Indian mahouts of Antiochus's war elephants (second century B.C.). Otherwise there are no explicit references to India in the Old Testament. However, archeological evidences of the Kulli culture of Baluchistan indicate that from c. 2800 B.C. there were contacts between Mesopotamia and the great cities of the Indus civilization.2 At the sites of ancient Sumerian cities of Kish, Lagash, and Ur, archeologists have discovered typical objects of the Indus civilization that indicate there existed a flourishing trade in spices between India and Mesopotamia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Temple Prayer of Solomon (1 Kings 8:1-9:9)
    1 The Temple Prayer of Solomon (1 Kings 8:1-9:9) By Ted Hildebrandt The Temple Prayer of Solomon in 1 Kings 8 and the divine response in 1 Kings 9 create one of the longest and most fascinating prayer narratives in the Old Testament. There are several questions we will seek to explore in this presentation paper. How does this prayer fit into the 1 Kings 1-11 narrative? What may be learned from ancient Near Eastern parallels concerning kings building and dedicating temples? What kinds of intertextual influences have impacted the shape of this prayer? How is one to understand the elusive character of Solomon from his prayer? How are the suppliants portrayed in the prayer? What do the seven Prayer Occasions (8:31-51) reveal about the types of situations which prompt prayer? How is God portrayed in this prayer? How does Solomon’s Temple Prayer fit into the literary structure of 1 Kings 1-11? In order to understand the framework of the Solomonic narrative of 1 Kings 1-11 in which the temple prayer is set, the literary structure should be noted before jumping into the prayer itself. The following is a useful chiastic structural diagram giving an overview of this narrative (adapted from Parker, 43; Williams, 66). 2 Frame Story chs. 1-2 [Adversaries: Adonijah, Joab, Abiathar] 1. Dream #1 3:1-15 [Asks for Wisdom at Gibeon high place] A Domestic 2. Women and Wisdom [Two women/one baby] 3:16-28 Policy 3. Administration and Wisdom 4:1-5:14 Favorable to Solomon B Labour 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Adan-Bayewitz, David. "On the Chronology of the Common Pottery of the Northern Roman Judaea/Palestine." One Land - Many Cultures
    Adan-Bayewitz, David. "On the Chronology of the Common Pottery of the Northern Roman Judaea/Palestine." One Land - Many Cultures. Archaeological Studies in Honour of S. Loffreda. Eds. Giovanni Claudio Bottini, Leah Di Segni and Lesław Daniel Chrupcala. Jerusalem: Franciscan Printing Press, 2003. 5-32. Adan-Bayewitz, David, Frank Asaro, Moshe Wiedner, and Robert D. Giauque. "Preferential Distribution of Lamps from the Jerusalem Area in the Late Second Temple Period (Late First Century B.C.E. - 70 C.E.)." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 350 (2008): 37-85. Albert, Rosa Maria, Ruth Shahack-Gross, Dan Cabanes, Ayelet Gilboa, Simcha Lev-Yadun, Marta Portillo, Ilan Sharon, Elisabetta Boaretto, and Steve Weiner. "Phytolith-Rich Layers from the Late Bronze and Iron Ages at Tel Dor (Israel): Mode of Formation and Archaeological Significance." Journal of Archaeological Science 35.1 (2007): 57-75. Ariel, Donald T., Ilan Sharon, Jan. Gunneweg, and Isidore Perlman. "A Group of Stamped Hellenistic Storage Jar Handles from Dor." Israel Exploration Journal 35 (1985): 135-52. Avigad, Nahman. "The Priest of Dor." Israel Exploration Journal 25 (1975): 101-05. ---. "A Hebrew Seal Depicting a Sailing Ship." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 246 (1982): 59-62. ---. "The Ship of Oniyahu - A Hebrew Seal Depicting a Sailing Vessel." Qadmoniot 16 (1983): 124-26. Ayalon, Y., ed. The Coast of Dor, Society for the Protection of Nature. 1988. Baines, John. "On Wenamun as a Literary Text." Literatur und Politik im pharaonischen und ptolemäischen Ägypten: Vorträge der Tagung zum Gedenken an Georges Posener 5.-10. September 1996 in Leipzig.
    [Show full text]
  • Lachish Fortifications and State Formation in the Biblical Kingdom
    Radiocarbon, Vol 00, Nr 00, 2019, p 1–18 DOI:10.1017/RDC.2019.5 © 2019 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona LACHISH FORTIFICATIONS AND STATE FORMATION IN THE BIBLICAL KINGDOM OF JUDAH IN LIGHT OF RADIOMETRIC DATINGS Yosef Garfinkel1* • Michael G Hasel2 • Martin G Klingbeil2 • Hoo-Goo Kang3 • Gwanghyun Choi1 • Sang-Yeup Chang1 • Soonhwa Hong4 • Saar Ganor5 • Igor Kreimerman1 • Christopher Bronk Ramsey6 1Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel 2Institute of Archaeology, Southern Adventist University, USA 3Seoul Jangsin University, Korea 4Institute of Bible Geography of Korea, Korea 5Israel Antiquities Authority, Israel 6Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, UK ABSTRACT. When and where the process of state formation took place in the biblical kingdom of Judah is heavily debated. Our regional project in the southwestern part of Judah, carried out from 2007 to the present, includes the excavation of three Iron Age sites: Khirbet Qeiyafa, Tel Lachish, and Khirbet al-Ra’i. New cultural horizons and new fortification systems have been uncovered, and these discoveries have been dated by 59 radiometric determinations. The controversial question of when the kingdom was able to build a fortified city at Lachish, its foremost center after Jerusalem, is now resolved thanks to the excavation of a previously unknown city wall, dated by radiocarbon (14C) to the second half of the 10th century BCE. KEYWORDS: Iron Age, Kingdom of Judah, Khirbet al-Ra’i, Khirbet Qeiyafa, Lachish, radiometric chronology. INTRODUCTION The debate over the chronology of the Iron Age is one of the central controversies in the current scholarship of the archaeology of the southern Levant as well as biblical studies.
    [Show full text]