Tel Kedesh Is Located on the Edge of a Mountainous Immediately West of the Building
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
T TEL KEDESH large building at the southeastern corner of the lower plateau along with a few smaller structures Tel Kedesh is located on the edge of a mountainous immediately west of the building. This large build- plateau that extends about 20 miles (36 km) east- ing was constructed early in the period of Achae- ward from Tyre, on the Mediterranean shore, to the menid Persian rule, meaning the time of Ezra, edge of the Hula basin. The site, which measures Nehemiah, and the Chronicler, and then occupied 2,953 ft (900 m) north–south, dominates a small, more or less continually until the later second cen- well-watered, fertile upland valley about 1,476 ft tury B.C.E., meaning the time of the Maccabees. (450 m) above sea level. Steep cliffs demarcate its Summary of Excavation Results. In six excavation eastern edge, forming a precipitous and topographi- seasons between 1999 and 2010 approximately two- cally dramatic boundary with the Hula basin almost thirds of a large structure were excavated; it was 1,312 ft (400 m) below. Tel Kedesh is a double mound, well built and in places lavishly decorated, measur- with a high northern acropolis and a long lower tell ing 183.7 ft (56 m) east–west by 131.2 ft (40 m) that extends some 1,312 ft (400 m) to the south. north–south, with rooms organized around a large, Throughout recorded history, the site’s geographic off-center courtyard. This building, the Persian– position has informed its character as a border set- Hellenistic Administrative Building, served under tlement. It was a Canaanite stronghold in the time of three successive foreign dynasties: the Achaemenid Joshua (Josh 12:22), a tribal city of refuge for the Persians, the Ptolemies, and the Seleucids. The build- Israelites (Josh 20:7, 21:32), and an outpost of the ing was abandoned after a nearby battle in 144/43 Phoenician city of Tyre in the time of the Jewish B.C.E. between the Hasmonean Jonathan and the revolt against Rome (Josephus, J.W. 2.459, 4.104). Seleucid Demetrius II. It was partially reoccupied Chronological Range. Surveys and excavations during the last third of the second century B.C.E.by have documented occupation at Tel Kedesh from people whose origins and affiliations are uncertain the third millennium B.C.E. through 1948, when Arab but whose lifestyle was different and poorer than that villagers living on the acropolis left during the Israeli of the previous occupants. While the Administrative War of Independence. The period discussed in the Building’s footprint remained the same throughout present entry is much shorter, however, as it reflects its occupations and remodelings, different masonry only the findings of the authors’ excavations from techniques distinguish the Persian, imperial Hellenis- 1997 to 2010. In these years, work focused on a single tic and postimperial Hellenistic builders. 373 374 TEL KEDESH The Achaemenid Period. In the year 538 B.C.E., the columns and, thus, may be termed stylobates. The Persian monarch Cyrus entered the city of Babylon marks appear on two central blocks of the western in triumph, consolidating his hold over the heart- stylobate and on every third block of the eastern land of the former Neo-Babylonian empire and stylobate and its corner leg. Finally, within Hellenis- thereby bringing the entirety of the southern Levant tic-period walls east and west of the stylobates, under Achaemenid Persian rule. In Babylon, Cyrus short column shafts of white limestone were reused encountered groups of foreign exiles who had been as building stone. Neither bases nor capitals for brought forcibly to the city after their own home- these columns have been found. lands had been taken. Among these exiles were These various pieces of evidence support a partial Judeans, whom Cyrus famously allowed to return reconstruction of the original building. The exterior to Jerusalem. When the Judeans returned, it was to a footprint is the same as that of the later Hellenistic region still inhabited by other peoples whom the building. Entry was from the east, into a ð-shaped Babylonians had permitted to remain. Chief among colonnaded court. Once inside, one passed between those who had stayed in the intervening era were two large columns on the western stylobate into a Phoenicians, whose coastal cities prospered through- large open-air courtyard in the building’s western out the sixth century B.C.E. half. This courtyard had a thick floor of crushed The Persian Administrative Building: plan and whitewashed limestone, with a drainage channel date of construction. Stratigraphic and architectural in the southeastern corner. Around the courtyard data allow for the partial reconstruction of an earlier were various narrow rectangular or square spaces. structure on whose foundations the Hellenistic The size and form of the exterior entrance and the Administrative Building was fashioned. The strati- manner in which access from the plain below was graphic evidence comes from fills beneath the large achieved cannot be determined. pebble/cobbled floor of the western court as well The Administrative Building’s substantial size as those running beneath the northwestern and and elaborate plan reflect a palatial and/or admin- southeastern corners, where no pottery later than istrative function. It is similar in several respects to the Persian period appears. The architectural evi- the so-called Residency at Lachish. Both structures dence consists of the types and arrangements of are wide rectangles with entry on the short side, a building stones. While most walls were constructed large interior courtyard whose entry was framed by of coarse, dark gray limestone boulders, roughly columns, and long, narrow spaces to the sides and hewn, several also incorporate distinctive large ash- rear. Both buildings employed interior freestanding lar blocks of fine, hard-grained, white limestone. columns, although their specific forms differed: at The large limestone ashlars are all in their original Lachish columns were built up with short drums, positions, whereas the upper parts of those same while at Kedesh they were constructed of longer walls were clearly rebuilt of smaller rubble and shaft sections. smaller, poorer-quality limestone ashlars and rubble A specific date for original construction and dura- associated with floors of Hellenistic date. Thus, the tion of use may be derived from a close analysis of lower courses with large limestone ashlars appear to the imported Attic pottery found in fill deposits predate the Hellenistic era and are likely remnants throughout the site. A total of 248 fragments of of earlier, Persian-era walls. On the eastern side of Attic pottery occur, of which 170 are narrowly dat- the building are two substantial lengths of white able. They range from ca. 510–480 B.C.E. down to ca. limestone blocks: first, a 32.8 ft (10 m) north–south 325–275 B.C.E. The great majority of vessels are cups stretch and, second, 13 ft (4 m) to the east, a 39.4 ft and bowls suitable for table service, though a fair (12 m) north–south stretch connected to a short number of lekythoi (oil or perfume flasks) also occur. east–west corner leg. Circular setting marks on the It appears that the Administrative Building was surfaces indicate that they originally supported constructed by ca. 500 B.C.E., in the early years of TEL KEDESH 375 Achaemenid control and shortly after the first wave of Judeans were granted permission to return from Babylon to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. The function of the building and the character of its inhabitants. Few artifacts remain from the two centuries of Persian-period occupation. The occu- pants left little behind, and subsequent use of the building erased most earlier floors and fills. A hand- ful of objects, along with the local pottery, provide a partial reflection of the lives and character of the building’s inhabitants. These fall into four groups: imported and luxury goods, commercial/administra- Phoenician glass seals from the Persian period. Andrea Berlin tive items, utilitarian objects, and household pottery. and Sharon Herbert, Tel Kedesh Excavations Various imported and luxury goods, almost all represented only by small fragments, reveal reason- for grasping, and a tapered wall to facilitate stack- ably well-off and well-connected inhabitants. In ing. Petrographic analysis shows that these trans- addition to the Attic pottery, these include two port containers come from the Hula basin, just dishes of polished hard stone, several perfume bot- below the Kedesh plateau. They likely carried some tles of glass and alabaster, two bronze bracelets with local commodity, perhaps wine or oil. animal finials, a pair of small silver earrings, a faience The bulla may be this period’s most important amulet in the form of Horus, two small lumps of kohl, find. The impression, stamped by a conical stone two conical glass seals, and a green jasper scarab. seal, shows two rampant gazelles propping them- Such vessels and jewelry represent the era’s standard selves against a central, tall, stylized sunflower, small luxuries and, as such, reveal little about the their heads turned outward. Each has only a single specific character of the building’s inhabitants. foreleg. A lunate crescent hangs in the space above The glass seals and scarab are more informative. the sunflower. The type of seal and image style are One glass seal shows the Persian king, identifiable Neo-Babylonian. An almost identical seal impressed by his jagged crown and long, folded robe, dominat- 13 tablets in the famous Murasu archive from Nippur, ing two lions in a pose known as “Lord of the Ani- a collection of business records from a well-con- mals.” The second glass seal shows a variant, with the nected entrepreneurial family dating between 427 Phoenician deity Melqart smiting two lions.