DOCSLIB.ORG

Beth Shean: a New Understanding of Its Fortification and Status, In: A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Beth Shean: a New Understanding of Its Fortification and Status, In: A Tel Beth-Shean: History and Archaeology AMIHAI MAZAR Tel Beth-Shean is one of the most extensively explored biblical sites in the Land of Israel: two expeditions excavated the site over many years, yielding vast quantities of archaeological data. This, together with the limited number of textual sources, makes Beth-Shean an intriguing site for research. The following article provides an overview of the textual sources and archaeological data relating to all periods of occupation at the site through the end of the Iron Age, and a short discussion of the relationship between the textual and archaeological sources. Beth-Shean in the Written Sources Egyptian Texts The earliest reference to Beth-Shean may appear in the Egyptian Exe- cration Texts, although the reading is disputed. 1 The city is mentioned in the topographic list of Thutmose III at Karnak (No. 110: bt š’ir ). 2 Beth- Shean appears only once in the Amarna letters of the 14th century, re- ferred to as bit ša-a-ni in a letter from Abdi-Heba, ruler of Jerusalem (EA 289). 3 After mentioning Gath Carmel as the city ruled by of Tagi, Abdi- Heba notes that the men of Gath comprise the garrison in Beth-Shean, that is, his enemies make up the Pharaoh’s protective forces to the north. Further on, Abdi-Heba connects Tagi to the sons of Lab’ayu, the ruler of Shechem, in the context of stirring up hostility against the Pha- raoh. A petrographic study of the Amarna letters has revealed that while most of the tablets of Abdi-Heba’s letters were made of local hill- country clay, one was made of Jordan Valley clay (EA 285), perhaps 1 Cf. Mazar/Mullins (2007), 1–2 (with references). 2 Cf. Simons (1937), 27–44; Aharoni (1979), 156–166, esp. 163; Redford (1992), 156–160. 3 Cf. Moran (1992), 332–333; Pritchard (1950), 489; Aharoni (1979), 170–176. 240 Amihai Mazar produced and written by a scribe at Beth-Shean itself. 4 Beth-Shean is also mentioned six times in topographic lists of Seti I. 5 In a monumental stela of Seti I, found at Beth-Shean, the city is described as besieged by the rulers of Hamath and Pehal, while Reh ob9 remained loyal to the Pharaoh. 6 Ramesses II refers to Beth-Shean once in a list from Karnak, and Papyrus Anastasi I, probably of the same dating, mentions Beth- Shean in conjunction with Reh ob9 in relation to crossing the Jordan Riv- er. 7 The city is mentioned again in Shoshenq I’s list at Karnak, aside Reh ob.9 8 Biblical Texts The following biblical sources mention Beth-Shean: • Josh. 17:11: Beth-Shean is mentioned together with other cities in the Jezreel Valley and on the Coastal Plain as Manassite cities in the territories of Issachar and Asher, referring specifically to the Canaanite population that continued to inhabit these re- gions under Israelite hegemony (vv. 12–13). • Judg. 1:27: Beth-Shean is mentioned as one of the Canaanite ci- ties in the valley, not conquered by Manasseh. The list of such towns repeats the list in Josh. 17:11, with some changes. • 1 Samuel 31 and 1 Chron. 10:8–12: following the death of Saul in the battle on Gilboa, the Philistines hung his body and the bodies of his three sons on the walls of Beth-Shean. People from Yavesh-Gilead brought the bodies to their city, burned them, and buried the bones. • 1 Kings 4:12: Beth-Shean is mentioned as one of the towns in the fifth administrative district of Solomon, governed by Baana Ben Ahilud. The district includes the Jezreel Valley and part of the Jordan Valley. • 1 Chron. 7:29: Beth-Shean is mentioned among the cities of Ma- nasseh, derivative from Josh. 17:11 and Judg. 1:27. 4 Cf. Goren/Finkelstein/Na’aman (2004), 267–269. 5 Cf. Ahituv (1984), 78–79 (with references). 6 Cf. Rowe (1930), 25–29, Fig. 5 and Pl. 41; Pritchard (1950), 253; Kitchen (1968), 11–12; Higginbotham (2000), 22–24 (with references to earlier literature). 7 Cf. Ahituv (1984), 19, 79; Pritchard (1950), 477. In the Egyptian hieroglyphic texts, the name is always written as Beth-ŝā’l. 8 Cf. Ahituv (1984), 79. Tel Beth-Shean: History and Archaeology 241 The Site Biblical Beth-Shean is identified with Tel Beth-Shean (Tell el-Hosn9 in Arabic), a steep, prominent mound overlooking the Beth-Shean Valley. Fig. 1: Aerial view of Tel Beth-Shean during 1994 season (looking west). The top of the mound is 113 m below sea level, some 12 m above the natural hill on which the site is located. The mound is surrounded on all sides by deep ravines and commands the main road descending from the Jezreel and Harod Valleys to the Beth-Shean Valley that con- nects the northern Coastal Plain with Transjordan. This latitudinal road intersects with the important longitudinal road that traverses the Jor- dan Valley and continues northward towards the Sea of Galilee, and from there either to Damascus or the Lebanese Bek’a. These strategic advantages, as well as the abundant water supply and fertile lands nearby, made Beth-Shean an attractive site for a settlement for thou- sands of years. Although the tell is larger than 4 ha in area, its northern part was not settled for most of the biblical period, and its southern and perhaps western edges were probably cut away during the Roman period. 9 The Hebrew University (HU) excavations have shown that for most of the 2nd millennium BCE, the settled area was limited to the 9 Cf. Arubas (2006), 48–60. 242 Amihai Mazar summit of the mound, which is not larger than 1.5–2 ha, inhabited by a community of not more than ca. 500 persons. 10 The Beth-Shean Valley is strewn with dozens of mounds and ruins of various sizes, the largest of which is Tel Rehov9 (Tell es-S9 arem9 in Arabic), 5 km south of Beth-Shean. This 10 ha large tell was the location of the city-state of Reh ob9 in the 2nd millennium BCE.11 Other sites in the valley are much smaller, evidence for a complex and hierarchical settlement pattern. Subsistence in the valley was most probably based on irrigation agriculture, facilitated by the abundance of springs lo- cated at high elevations compared to the fields. The HU investigations at Tel Beth-Shean are part of a regional research project that includes surveys and the long-term excavations at Tel Reh ob.9 12 The Excavations Extensive excavations were conducted at Tel Beth-Shean by the Univer- sity Museum of the University of Pennsylvania Expedition (UME) bet- ween 1921 and 1933, directed consecutively by Clarence Fisher, Alan Rowe, and Gerald M. FitzGerald. 13 This was one of the first multi-level tells excavated systematically in Palestine, and it provided a sequence of material culture from 18 occupation levels from the late Neolithic through the Medieval period. The framework of the archaeological history of the site was established, and many important buildings and finds were exposed. The excavation methods used during the 1920s and early 1930s, however, were insufficient in terms of modern ar- chaeological research, and in 1983, a three-week excavation season was conducted by Yigael Yadin and Shulamit Geva of the Hebrew Univer- sity.14 Subsequently, the present author conducted nine excavation 10 This population estimate is based on a coefficient of 250 persons per built-up hec- tare, cf. Schloen (2001), 169–183. James/McGovern (1993), 238, calculated the town’s area as 5 ha, but they included the northern part of the mound, which in my view remained unsettled during the 2nd millennium BCE. Their population estimate was based on a coefficient of 400 persons per hectare, which is too high . 11 Cf. Mazar (2008b). 12 Regional research on the Middle Bronze Age was conducted by A. Maeir as part of his PhD-thesis at the Hebrew University, cf. Maeir (1997). A survey of 120 sq km around Tel Reh ob9 was carried out by A. Cahn (unpublished M.A. thesis at Hebrew University Jerusalem). Both confirmed the results of earlier surveys of the valley car- ried out by N. Zori. 13 Cf. esp. Rowe (1930; 1940); Oren (1973); James (1966); James/McGovern (1993). 14 Cf. Yadin/Geva (1986). Tel Beth-Shean: History and Archaeology 243 seasons on the tell between 1989 and 1996. 15 These excavations took advantage of the fact that the UME excavations had created several large steps on the summit of the mound, in each of which different periods had been exposed. Fig. 2: Topographic Plan of Tel Beth-Shean, with Location of Excavation Areas of Hebrew University Expedition and main Structures, dating to various periods in each area. We could thus excavate different periods in the ‘terraces’ left by the UME some 60 years earlier, and were able to study almost the entire stratigraphic sequence of the site using modern methods and to inves- tigate many aspects of this important site (see Fig. 2). Tab. 1 presents correlations between the UME strata (denoted ‘Levels’ by them) and the various phases in each of the HU excavation areas. 15 The excavations were conducted under the auspices of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the framework of a joint expedition coordinated by the Beth-Shean Tourism Development Administration. For additional details on the expedition and the team, cf. Mazar (2006a), 9–25. Special thanks go to Nava Panitz-Cohen and Ro- bert Mullins for their invaluable assistance throughout the field work and publica- tion processes.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Christian's Map of the Holy Land
    A CHRISTIAN'S MAP OF THE HOLY LAND Sidon N ia ic n e o Zarefath h P (Sarepta) n R E i I T U A y r t s i Mt. of Lebanon n i Mt. of Antilebanon Mt. M y Hermon ’ Beaufort n s a u b s s LEGEND e J A IJON a H Kal'at S Towns visited by Jesus as I L e o n Nain t e s Nimrud mentioned in the Gospels Caesarea I C Philippi (Banias, Paneas) Old Towns New Towns ABEL BETH DAN I MA’ACHA T Tyre A B a n Ruins Fortress/Castle I N i a s Lake Je KANAH Journeys of Jesus E s Pjlaia E u N s ’ Ancient Road HADDERY TYRE M O i REHOB n S (ROSH HANIKRA) A i KUNEITRA s Bar'am t r H y s u Towns visited by Jesus MISREPOTH in K Kedesh sc MAIM Ph a Sidon P oe Merom am n HAZOR D Tyre ic o U N ACHZIV ia BET HANOTH t Caesarea Philippi d a o Bethsaida Julias GISCALA HAROSH A R Capernaum an A om Tabgha E R G Magdala Shave ACHSAPH E SAFED Zion n Cana E L a Nazareth I RAMAH d r Nain L Chorazin o J Bethsaida Bethabara N Mt. of Beatitudes A Julias Shechem (Jacob’s Well) ACRE GOLAN Bethany (Mt. of Olives) PISE GENES VENISE AMALFI (Akko) G Capernaum A CABUL Bethany (Jordan) Tabgha Ephraim Jotapata (Heptapegon) Gergesa (Kursi) Jericho R 70 A.D. Magdala Jerusalem HAIFA 1187 Emmaus HIPPOS (Susita) Horns of Hittin Bethlehem K TIBERIAS R i Arbel APHEK s Gamala h Sea of o Atlit n TARICHAFA Galilee SEPPHORIS Castle pelerin Y a r m u k E Bet Tsippori Cana Shearim Yezreel Valley Mt.
    [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]
  • Shiloh and Shechem: Competing Traditions? Paper for SBL Berlin, 2002 by Ingrid Hjelm, University of Copenhagen Diachronically, I
    Reproduced from the Library of the Editor of www.theSamaritanUpdate.com Copyright 2008 Shiloh and Shechem: Competing Traditions? Paper for SBL Berlin, 2002 By Ingrid Hjelm, University of Copenhagen Diachronically, in biblical tradition, whether Hebrew or Greek, and in Samaritan chronicles, Shiloh stands between the Shechem of the Patriarchs and the Jerusalem of the Davidides. While in biblical traditions, Shiloh’s connotations are ambiguous, in Samaritan tradition, the location is presented entirely negatively, as a competing cult place from the time of the interim between the kings of the Ra ∗w#n (MT: judges) and the kings of the Phanuta , i.e. the Israelite monarchies. In Samaritan tradition, Shiloh owes its origin to the priest Eli’s departure from Gerizim. The narrative occurs in all Samaritan traditions with slight variations. The young Eli, son of Jefunneh of the lineage of Ithamar, is given the honorary office of being the chancellor of the temple treasures 1[1] under the leadership of the high priest Uzzi ( ∫ ), whose authority he challenges. 2[2] The quarrel results in Eli’s departure from Gerizim and his erection of a temple and cult in Shiloh. A variant tradition involves exclusion, because of non-observant behaviour ( Chron. II ¸ §LK*, U*, AF page 41 ). 3[3] Eli’s departure turns the fate of all Israel, which looses its coherence and becomes split into three separate groups (cf. Chron. II , Judg. §LO*-T*; 1 Sam. §BA*-F*; AF page 42) : ‘A faction on Mount Gerizim; an heretical faction that followed false gods; and the faction that followed Eli son of Yafn 3 in Shiloh’.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Bronze I Period) Apologetic Core, Let Me Make This Important Point Very Clear
    By Michael A. Grisanti challenges. (1) Anyone who has worked in archaeology to any degree understands that the collection of data from a dig site is Introduction very scientific and objective, while the interpretation of that data is much more subjective. All archaeologists bring numerous For one who loves biblical studies and is intensely interested presuppositions to their work and that affects what evidence in its intersection with history and archaeology, the potential they emphasize and how they interpret what they find and do impact of the latter on the former deserves attention. In various not find. Consequently, I fully understand that my overview academic and popular settings, numerous scholars in these of various archaeological discoveries below will not satisfy fields make sweeping statements about the disjuncture between everyone. (2) I have chosen certain archaeological discoveries archaeology and/or history and the Bible. Those statements are to make my point, omitting some other very important examples made with authority and have widespread impact, even on an that deserve mention. Not all will agree with my choices for evangelical audience. How do the plain statements of Scripture consideration. (3) I also understand my limitations as a biblical fare when related to what seem to be the objective facts of scholar rather than a trained archaeologist. Regardless, I argue archaeology and history? According to Ron Hendel, below that numerous discoveries made in the last 15–20 years demonstrate that biblical narratives have a “ring of truth” to them Archaeology did not illumine the times and events of when compared with significant and somewhat insignificant Abraham, Moses and Joshua.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel's Conquest of Canaan: Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec
    Israel's Conquest of Canaan: Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec. 27, 1912 Author(s): Lewis Bayles Paton Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Apr., 1913), pp. 1-53 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259319 . Accessed: 09/04/2012 16:53 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp 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]. The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature. http://www.jstor.org JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE Volume XXXII Part I 1913 Israel's Conquest of Canaan Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec. 27, 1912 LEWIS BAYLES PATON HARTFORD THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY problem of Old Testament history is more fundamental NO than that of the manner in which the conquest of Canaan was effected by the Hebrew tribes. If they came unitedly, there is a possibility that they were united in the desert and in Egypt. If their invasions were separated by wide intervals of time, there is no probability that they were united in their earlier history. Our estimate of the Patriarchal and the Mosaic traditions is thus conditioned upon the answer that we give to this question.
    [Show full text]
  • Tel Dan ‒ Biblical Dan
    Tel Dan ‒ Biblical Dan An Archaeological and Biblical Study of the City of Dan from the Iron Age II to the Hellenistic Period Merja Alanne Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by due permission of the Faculty of Theology, at the University of Helsinki in the Main Building, Auditorium XII on the 18th of March 2017, at 10 a.m. ISBN 978-951-51-3033-4 (paperback) ISBN 978-951-51-3034-1 (PDF) Unigrafia Helsinki 2017 “Tell el-Kadi” (Tel Dan) “Vettä, varjoja ja rehevää laidunta yllin kyllin ‒ mikä ihana levähdyspaikka! Täysin siemauksin olemme kaikki nauttineet kristallinkirkasta vettä lähteestä, joka on ’maailman suurimpia’, ja istumme teekannumme ympärillä mahtavan tammen juurella, jonne ei mikään auringon säde pääse kuumuutta tuomaan, sillä aikaa kuin hevosemme käyvät joen rannalla lihavaa ruohoa ahmimassa. Vaivumme niihin muistoihin, jotka kiertyvät levähdyspaikkamme ympäri.” ”Kävimme kumpua tarkastamassa ja huomasimme sen olevan mitä otollisimman kaivauksille. Se on soikeanmuotoinen, noin kilometrin pituinen ja 20 m korkuinen; peltona oleva pinta on hiukkasen kovera. … Tulimme ajatelleeksi sitä mahdollisuutta, että reunoja on kohottamassa maahan peittyneet kiinteät muinaisjäännökset, ehkä muinaiskaupungin muurit. Ei voi olla mitään epäilystä siitä, että kumpu kätkee poveensa muistomerkkejä vuosituhansia kestäneen historiansa varrelta.” ”Olimme kaikki yksimieliset siitä, että kiitollisempaa kaivauspaikkaa ei voine Palestiinassakaan toivoa. Rohkenin esittää sen ajatuksen, että tämä Pyhän maan pohjoisimmassa kolkassa oleva rauniokumpu
    [Show full text]
  • Qedem 59, 60, 61 (2020) Amihai Mazar and Nava Panitz-Cohen
    QEDEM 59, 60, 61 (2020) AMIHAI MAZAR AND NAVA PANITZ-COHEN Tel Reḥov, A Bronze and Iron Age City in the Beth-Shean Valley Volume I. Introductions, Synthesis and Excavations on the Upper Mound (Qedem 59) (XXIX+415 pp.). ISBN 978-965-92825-0-0 Tel Reḥov, A Bronze and Iron Age City in the Beth-Shean Valley Volume II, The Lower Mound: Area C and the Apiary (Qedem 60) (XVIII+658 pp.). ISBN 978-965-92825-1-7 Tel Reḥov, A Bronze and Iron Age City in the Beth-Shean Valley Volume III, The Lower Mound: Areas D, E, F and G (Qedem 61) (XVIII+465 pp.). ISBN 978-965-92825-2-4 Excavations at Tel Reḥov, carried out from 1997 to 2012 under the direction of Amihai Mazar on behalf of the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, revealed significant remains from the Early Bronze, Late Bronze and Iron Ages. The most prominent period is Iron Age IIA (10th–9th centuries BCE). The rich and varied architectural remains and finds from this period, including the unique apiary, an open-air sanctuary and an exceptional insula of buildings, make Tel Rehov a key site for understanding this significant period in northern Israel. These three volumes are the first to be published of the five that comprise the final report of the excavations at Tel Rehov. Volume I (Qedem 59) includes chapters on the environment, geology and historical geography of the site, as well as an introduction to the excavation project, a comprehensive overview and synthesis, as well as the stratigraphy and architecture of the excavation areas on the upper mound: Areas A, B and J, accompanied by pottery figures arranged by strata and contexts.
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening Biblical Historicity Vis-Ã
    Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Libraries Research Publications 9-1-2010 Strengthening Biblical Historicity vis-à-vis Minimalism, 1992-2008, Part 1: Introducing a Bibliographic Essay in Five Parts Lawrence J. Mykytiuk [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/lib_research Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, History of Religion Commons, and the Library and Information Science Commons Mykytiuk, Lawrence J., "Strengthening Biblical Historicity vis-à-vis Minimalism, 1992-2008, Part 1: Introducing a Bibliographic Essay in Five Parts" (2010). Libraries Research Publications. Paper 148. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/lib_research/148 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. The following article first appeared in Journal of Religious and Theological Information 9/3–4 (2010): 71–83, which became available online on November 25, 2010. It is used as part of a pilot program enacted November 2011 by the Routledge imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. To link to this article’s Version of Record, click on: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10477845.2010.526920 Strengthening Biblical Historicity vis-à-vis Minimalism, 1992-2008, Part 1: Introducing a Bibliographic Essay in Five Parts LAWRENCE J. MYKYTIUK Purdue University Libraries, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA Abstract This is the first in a series of five articles which cover one aspect of a debate in biblical and ancient Near Eastern studies. In question is the historical reliability of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). Historical/biblical minimalism, the side in the debate which finds the Hebrew Bible almost completely unreliable as a source for history, has already received substantial bibliographic treatment.
    [Show full text]
  • Israelite Inscriptions from the Time of Jeremiah and Lehi
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Faculty Publications 2020-02-04 Israelite Inscriptions from the Time of Jeremiah and Lehi Dana M. Pike Brigham Young University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, Mormon Studies Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Pike, Dana M., "Israelite Inscriptions from the Time of Jeremiah and Lehi" (2020). Faculty Publications. 3697. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub/3697 This Peer-Reviewed Article is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Chapter 7 Israelite Inscriptions from the Time of Jeremiah and Lehi Dana M. Pike The greater the number of sources the better when investi- gating the history and culture of people in antiquity. Narrative and prophetic texts in the Bible and 1 Nephi have great value in helping us understand the milieu in which Jeremiah and Lehi received and fulfilled their prophetic missions, but these records are not our only documentary sources. A number of Israelite inscriptions dating to the period of 640–586 b.c., the general time of Jeremiah and Lehi, provide additional glimpses into this pivotal and primarily tragic period in Israelite history. The number of inscriptions discovered from ancient Israel and its immediate neighbors—Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, and Phoenicia—pales in comparison to the bountiful harvest of texts from ancient Assyria, Babylonia, and Egypt.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient DNA and Population Turnover in Southern Levantine Pigs
    OPEN Ancient DNA and Population Turnover in SUBJECT AREAS: Southern Levantine Pigs- Signature of the EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Sea Peoples Migration? PHYLOGENETICS Meirav Meiri1,2, Dorothee Huchon2, Guy Bar-Oz3, Elisabetta Boaretto4, Liora Kolska Horwitz5, Aren Maeir6, ZOOLOGY Lidar Sapir-Hen1, Greger Larson7, Steve Weiner8 & Israel Finkelstein1 ARCHAEOLOGY 1Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel, 2Department of Zoology, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Received 3 4 30 May 2013 Israel, Department of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel, Weizmann Institute-Max Planck Center for Integrative Archaeology, D-REAMS Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel, 5National Natural Accepted History Collections, Faculty of Life Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91905, Israel, 6The Institute of 23 July 2013 Archaeology, The Martin (Szusz) Department of Land of Israel Studies and Archaeology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 52900, Israel, 7Durham Evolution and Ancient DNA, Department of Archaeology, University of Durham, Durham DH1 3LE, United Kingdom, Published 8Kimmel Center for Archaeological Science, Department of Structural Biology, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, 24 October 2013 Israel. Correspondence and Near Eastern wild boars possess a characteristic DNA signature. Unexpectedly, wild boars from Israel have requests for materials the DNA sequences of European wild boars and domestic pigs. To understand how this anomaly evolved, we sequenced DNA from ancient and modern Israeli pigs. Pigs from Late Bronze Age (until ca. 1150 BCE) Israel should be addressed to shared haplotypes of modern and ancient Near Eastern pigs. European haplotypes became dominant M.M. (meirav.meiri@ only during the Iron Age (ca.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Jaffa: from the Bronze Age to the Persian Period
    C HA pt ER 6 EARLY JAFFA: FROM THE BRONZE AGE TO THE PERSIAN PERIOD A ARON A . B URKE University of California, Los Angeles lthough Jaffa is repeatedly identified featured a natural, deepwater anchorage along its rocky as one of the most important ports of the western side. A natural breakwater is formed by a ridge, Asouthern Levantine coast during the Bronze located about 200 m from the western edge of the Bronze and Iron Ages, limited publication of its archaeological Age settlement, that can still be seen today.2 remains and equally limited consideration of its his- Although a geomorphological study has yet to be torical role have meant that a review of its historical undertaken, a number of factors indicate that an estuary significance is still necessary. Careful consideration of existed to the east of the site and functioned as the early Jaffa’s geographic location, its role during the Bronze harbor of Jaffa (see Hanauer 1903a, 1903b).3 The data and Iron Ages, and its continued importance until the for this include: (1) a depression that collected water early twentieth century C.E. reveal that its emergence to the south of the American (later German) colony as an important settlement and port was no accident. known as the Baasah (Clermont-Ganneau 1874:103; This essay reviews, therefore, the evidence for Jaffa’s see also Hanauer 1903b:258–260) (see also Figure 13.1 foundation and subsequent role from the Early Bronze and Figure 13.2); (2) a wall identified as a seawall that Age through the coming of Alexander at the end of the was encountered at some depth within this depression Persian period.
    [Show full text]
  • The Status of Jaffa in the First Century of the Current Era
    The Status of Jaffa in the First Century of the Current Era S. Applebaum A group of three Greek inscriptions recently published by Dr. Ya’akov Kaplan1 raises a number of questions relating to the status and history of Jaffa in the earlier period of the Roman Empire. The three inscriptions are nominally uniform, but were written in very careless lettering, two of them certainly by a semiliterate, being mere test sketches on moulds in which inscribed weights were to be cast. No. 2, however, was sufficiently clear to enable the text to be read, and to show that all three reflected one formula.2 The main point is that each ends with the name and function of a Jewish official — Judah the agoranomos, son of Zozomus (?). Not less important are the two signs opening the common formula; each of these represents the well-known sign Ἔ’, which stands for ‘Year’ in numerous Greek inscriptions,3 and is invariably followed by a figure. On inscription No. 2 this is Θ, i.e. year 9; No. 7 is a botched version of the same date; Θ is here represented by ‘O’. The figure on No. 3, on the other hand, is Δ , i.e. year 4. As the inscriptions begin with the name of the emperor Trajan, the years concerned are the fourth and ninth of his reign, i.e. 101/2 and 106/7. Dr. Kaplan has drawn my attention to the horizontal line or bar above the Ἔ’ sign, and, in his opinion, connected with it, as it commences the first line of the second inscription, numbered by him as ‘2’ (Plate 68, No.
    [Show full text]