Saturday, March 22, 2008

HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL OVERVIEW OF THE IRON AGE

The Iron Age is divided into two subsections, Iron I and Iron II. Iron I (1200-1000) illustrates both continuity and discontinuity with the previous Late Bronze Age. There is no definitive cultural break between the thirteenth and twelfth century throughout the entire region, although certain new features in the hill country, Transjordan and coastal region may suggest the appearance of the Aramaean and Sea People groups. There is evidence, however, that shows strong continuity with Bronze Age culture, although as one moves later into Iron I the culture begins to diverge more significantly from that of the late second millennium.

Iron II (1000-550) witnessed the rise of the states of Judah and Israel in the tenth-ninth century. These small principalities exercise considerable control over their particular regions due in part to the decline of the great powers, Assyria and Egypt, from about 1200 to 900. Beginning in the eighth century and certainly in the seventh century, Assyria reestablishes its authority over the eastern Mediterranean area and exercises almost complete control. The northern state of Israel is obliterated in 722/721 by King Sargon and its inhabitants taken into exile. Judah, left alone, gradually accommodates to Assyrian control, but towards the end of the seventh century it does revolt as the Assyrian empire disintegrated. Judah's freedom was short-lived, however, and eventually snuffed out by the Chaldean kings who conquered Jerusalem and took some of the ruling class into exile to Babylon. During the period of exile in Babylon, the area, particularly from Jerusalem south, shows a mark decline. Other areas just north of Jerusalem are almost unaffected by the catastrophe that befell Judah.

ON ETHNIC GROUPS IN THE IRON AGE

PHILISTINES AND SEA PEOPLES: Although the earliest depictions of Sea People occur in the reign of Seti I, the major incursion of these Aegean people happened about a century later during the reign of Ramesis III of the Twentieth Dynasty. Around 1180, Ramesis III defeated the Sea People in a land and sea battle at the borders of Egypt. The Philistines, one of the Sea People groups, are easily identified on the depiction of the battles by their distinctive headdresses. Since the 1920's, most scholars have linked those headdresses with some of the anthropoid coffin burials from Beth Shan and elsewhere in Eretz Israel. Be aware that a few scholars do not link all coffin burials with the Philistines, but with other groups including Canaanites and Egyptians. Besides the headdresses and biblical references, archaeological data suggest the appearance of a new group along the coast. The distinctive Philistine ware (Mycenean IIIc1b) appears in the twelfth century and continues into the eleventh century. This pottery tradition has close parallels to Cyprus as well as other islands in the eastern Mediterranean, and suggests that the Sea People may have originated from the eastern Mediterranean rather than Crete (Amos 9:7 and Jeremiah 47:4). Cremation burial, which can be cited from Anatolia and the Aegean, occurred in the coastal region beginning in the twelfth century and continued well into the seventh century.

The Philistine pentapolis came under control of David and remained generally part of Judah or Israel for most of the 10th and probably part of the ninth century. Later some of the Philistine city states exercised independence from the descendants of Jacob. Also, the general region became known as the land of the Palestu (=Palestine), or Philistines.

Recent excavations at Ashdod, Ashkelon, Tell Miqne (Ekron), Tell esh- Sharia (Ziklag) and Tell Qasile are amplifying our understanding of this intrusive Aegean culture. Sites, such as Ain Shems and even Sarepta, provide additional information on related cultures (e.g. Phoenicians).

ISRAELITES: When exactly the Israelite tribes settled or conquered the hill country of Palestine is somewhat debated due in part to a lack of conclusive evidence. Certainly in the twelfth century we begin to find evidence of a variant type of village culture in the hill country composed of small unfortified settlements, pillared houses, numerous silos, limited pottery repertoire and presence of collared-rim storage jar. There appear to be numerous such sites particularly but not exclusively north of Jerusalem in the tribal inheritance of Ephraim and Manasseh; in fact, there is a definite growth in settled population all along the hill country spur in Iron I. This culture pattern may extend into the lowlands at some sites later in Iron I (Megiddo).

Early in Iron II, major sites (Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer) show extensive construction on what appears to be similar plans. Other facilities are added in the next century expanding the types of "monumental" structures. Perhaps the most interesting of the new sites, the royal capital at Samaria, further amplifies our information about the Israelite culture in the ninth-eighth centuries. As for sites further to the south along the hill country spur, they also show a planned society with fortified cities, well-laid out streets, pillared houses, large warehouses, and complex water-systems. We have good evidence of industrial and agricultural activities, much more so than in the Bronze Age. Towards the end of Iron II, the material culture declines percipitously as sites are destroyed and are either abandoned or rebuilt on a more modest scale. Intrusive material particularly Mesopotamia also becomes more common place at a number of tells (Megiddo and Hazor). Finally, almost all the known Iron Age cities from Jerusalem southward are either destroyed or abandoned by the beginning of the sixth century.

The "historical" books of the bible remain the primary witness to the culture of Israel and Judah. The text, almost a polemic of the southern tribes against the religiosity of the northern tribes and other neighboring peoples, was composed mostly during this period and is written in part to chronological deity's actions in history. Care must be taken in using the text for historical reconstruction, however. First, it is hardly a complete history of the region and focuses mostly on Judaean society particularly in and around Jerusalem. Some of these works are obviously secondary sources or summaries (e.g. Kings and Chronicles), whereas others may be closer to first-hand accounts( e.g. Prophetic material). Second, the work as a whole is polemical and fails to present a modern, objective historical description of what happened in the past. Modern historians using current ideas in historiography, nevertheless, can work with these and other materials, including archaeological remains and other extra-biblical witnesses, to develop a sparse outline of the history of the descendants of Jacob.

CANAANITES: The Bronze Age culture does not suddenly disappear in the twelfth century. In fact, culture changes very little in the first half of Iron I at sites like Megiddo or Beth Shan. This may suggest that there is no significant cultural break throughout the entire region at the beginning of the Iron Age. As one examines later levels at these and other sites, however, the Bronze Age culture begins to alter. Primary burial practices slowly disappears in favor of secondary burial (Tell el-Farah S or Zeror) by the tenth century. Courtyard houses, a common Bronze Age form, is replaced by pillared houses at a number of sites in Iron II. Egyptianized artifacts are less common in Iron II except for sites along the immediate coast. Bronze weapons and forms are replaced by iron weapons. New Iron II artifacts begin to appear throughout the entire region. Thus, gradually, it seems, many of the characteristic forms and contexts of Bronze Age culture become less evident in later levels of Iron II, although it would be incorrect to conclude that the Bronze Age culture, we call Canaanite, disappeared entirely due to points of continuity that continue unabated from Bronze Age to Iron Age (e.g. compare the artifacts in Shrine 1 Sarepta with the temple of stratum VII-VI Beth Shan).

PHOENICIANS: The coastal region north of Carmel had been known since the time of Thothmosis IV as the land of the Fenkeu, or Phoenicians. In the Iron Age the Phoenician merchants plied their martime trade on the Mediterranean and were the first mariners to circumnavigate Africa. They established a number of Punic colonies in North Africa, Spain, France, Italy and the Aegean islands. Much of their culture in the Lebanese coast, however, remains undocumented in part due to disturbance of Iron Age sites by later Persian, Hellenistic and Roman cultures. Sarepta, excavated by James Pritchard, is one of the few sites from which we can document in Phoenicia proper the culture of these mariners of old in their homeland.

In many ways, one can summarize the material culture from Phoenicia and its colonies as reflecting developments on Canaanite culture from the Bronze Age. (Compare, for example, the small shrine at Sarepta to the Bronze Age temples from Beth Shan.) Of course, this culture is greatly influenced by the Aegean world and continues to reflect that eclectic world we characterize as Canaanite in the Bronze Age.

EGYPTIANS: Although it may be interpreted from Egyptian written sources that Egypt exercised little control over this region after the Nineteenth Dynasty, the archaeological evidence from Palestine suggests otherwise at least for the first kings of the Twentieth Dynasty. Beth Shan remained an Egyptian colony with houses built according to Egyptian style, complete with door lintel inscriptions in hieroglyphics. Egyptian architectural structures, square-shaped houses made of mud-brick, occur at Aphek, Ashdod, Beth Shan (1550 and 1700 houses), Gaza, Hesi, Jemmeh, Joppa, Tell el-Farah S (Sharuhen) and Tell Masos and Tell esh- Sharia (Ziklag). The Timna copper mines continue to be controlled until perhaps Ramesis VI. Egyptian pottery can be cited from many early Iron I sites as well. In summary, it seems at least plausible to suggest that Egypt continued to dominate this region at least until the mid-part of the century and perhaps to the end of the century at least at Beth Shan.

Egyptian contact in Iron II is limited to minor incursions. I Kings 9:16 records that the Egyptian Pharaoh destroyed Gezer. Shishak, the first Pharaoh of the 22nd Dynasty, led a military campaign during the fifth year of Rehoboam, Solomon's son (1 Kings 14:25-26, 2 Chronicles 12:2- 9). A boundary stela of the Egyptian monarch was set up at Megiddo, and the king recorded his victory on the first pylon at the Temple of Karnak. At the end of the seventh century, Egyptian forces attempted to defeat the army of Sennacherib. Necco, Pharaoh of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, campaigned in Palestine and northward to the Euphrates in 609. Necco's forces defeated Josiah at the Battle of Megiddo where the Judah king was slain in battle (2 Kings 23:29-30, 2 Chronicles 35:20-25).

ASSYRIANS: By the middle of the ninth century, Assyria is exercising some hegemony over the region of Palestine. The Battle of Qarqar (853) may have been a temporary set back for Assyria, but by 840/841 the Assyria King Shalmeneser III is accepting tribute from the Israel King Jehu. In the eighth century, Assyria campaigns throughout the region controlling the political life of the small principalities. Israel continues to try an exercise some independence which leads eventually to its demise in 722/21 when Sargon conquers Israel's capital. A number of Israel's key cities (Hazor and Megiddo) had been captured a decade before by Tiglath-pileser.

Judah remains alone and politically suppressed by Assyria in the seventh century. In 701, Sennacherib attacked most of Judah and even laid siege to Jerusalem. From that point on Judah remains a loyal vassal of Assyria until the reign of Josiah. By then, Assyria was beginning to decay from within, and King Josiah of Judah attempts to play political broker in this region eventually leads to his death at the hands of Egyptian King Necco at the battle of Megiddo (609). By then, Assyria no longer exists for all practice purposes as the Chaldean kings conquered the domains that once were part of Assyria's empire. (From Boston University Website.)

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE LATE BRONZE AGE

Egypt dominated the political life of Palestine during the Late Bronze Age, a period contemporary with the Egyptian New Kingdom. The first king of the Eighteenth Dynasty defeated the Hyksos at Avaris and continued the battle to Sharuhen in southern Palestine. Thothmosis I and Thothmosis III extended Egyptian influence over the entire region from the borders of Egypt to the Euphrates, the great river that flows backwards. Under the descendants of Thothmosis III, Egypt exercised full hegemony over Palestine by establishing systems of control over vital trade routes and local principalities. Towards the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty Egyptian control may have declined somewhat due to the general lack of attention to political and military matters during the Amarna period.

The Nineteenth Dynasty kings quickly reestablished Egyptian control under Seti I. By the middle of the thirteenth century Egypt lost control of much of northern Syria to the Hittite kings. The two major kings of this dynasty, Seti I and his son Ramesis II, carried out campaigns near Beth Shan. Later in the thirteenth century, Merneptah may have campaigned in Palestine if there is any historical credulity to his hymn of victory, sometimes called the Israelite stela.

The great Temple of Amon-Ra at Karnak is an excellent spot to understand Egypt's power and influence over the Asiatics. Asia was Amon-Ra's domain and the spoils of conquest/tribute supported the building of the world's largest religious structure. Tombs of noblemen, high official in the court and in the Temple at Karnak, also provide a wealth of information about Egyptian control and influence. In sites in Palestine, excavations show a slow but steady egyptianization of the culture as more egyptian or egyptianized artifacts appear in the latter half of the Late Bronze Age, and as egyptian practices (e.g. burial practices) become more the fashion. Remains from sites such as Beth Shan,Tell el-Farah (S), Hesi, Jemmeh, Masos, esh-Sharia and Aphek attest to their extensive control of this region. The copper mines at Timna seem to have been operated under Egyptian direction throughout the Nineteenth and part of the Twentieth Dynasties. All this evidence collectively indicates how thoroughly Egypt controlled this region.

Depictions of Asiatics: On Egyptian temple walls and tombs, the inhabitants of Syria and Palestine are depicted as vassals of their Egyptian overlords. Asiatics, usually dressed in long robes and wearing decorative headbands, bring tribute and produce into Egypt; are bound captive slaves or fierce mercenary soldiers; and work as corvee laborers assisting Egyptians in obtaining raw materials (timber and copper) and exotic produce (wine, oils and perhaps even opium). Of particular interest to archaeologists are the types of goods offered to the officials, for many of these items are known from excavations. The Egyptians did not hold Asiatics in high esteem and often depicted them as a pack of yelping dogs doing the bidding of their Egyptian masters.

THE CANAANITES AND THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS

Who are the Canaanites? And where is Canaan precisely? Both questions prove to be more difficult to answer than one might first suspect. The land of Canaan seems an imprecise geographical term that is applied sometimes to the entire region of the Egyptian empire and at other times to Lower Retenu or Djahi, that is, southern Lebanon, Israel, Jordan and the Sinai.

The Canaanites were one of many groups that inhabited the area and in Hebrew Bible the word became the designated term for all the inhabitants of the region before the Israelites. There is still some debate on the words etymology. Does it mean lowlanders? Or does Canaan mean the Land of Purple, a probable reference to the dye used to color cloth? Scholars who opt for this second interpretation note that the Greeks referred to the coastal region of Phoenicia as the purple land.

The Canaanites, or Bronze Age inhabitants, made a number of lasting contributions to ancient and modern society, such as specialized storage jars for the transportation of oil and wine, and musical instruments like the castenet. Their high art in working ivory as well as their skills in viticulture were prized in antiquity. Perhaps their most lasting contribution was the development of the alphabet from the proto-alphabetic script of Egyptian hieroglyphics. William Foxwell Albright and others have shown how a simplified syllabary of the Middle Bronze Age eventually was exported to the Greek and Roman worlds by the Phoenicians, northern coastal mariners of the Iron.

OVERVIEW OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL REMAINS

Two points need to be made concerning the archaeological remains from this period. First, there is strong cultural continuity between the Middle and Late Bronze Age. The assigned break between the two periods is more a function of Egyptian chronological history than a change in material culture. No excavator or historian familiar with the remains has suggested otherwise. Also, it is important to note that there are scant archaeological remains in the first part of the Late Bronze Age. Many sites in the hill country and Negev were abandoned. Other sites, especially in the southern coastal region, are destroyed and only marginally reoccupied in Late Bronze I.

A second important point about the Late Bronze Age concerns the egyptianization of this indigenous culture. Artifacts and building structures become more egyptian-like as one moves from Late Bronze I into Late Bronze II. Cultural practices also change to Egyptian fashion (e.g. burial practices). Such egyptianization may be due to the proximity of Egypt to Palestine as well as the ways in which Egypt exercised complete control over this region. (NOTE: Egyptianization of Nubia occurred during the same period and may speak to how Egypt influence native culture to adopt an egyptian life style.) As Albright and others may have rightly noted, Palestine proper remained generally loyal to Egypt throughout the Late Bronze Age, while Upper Retenu, modern Syria, did not.

Images and related material are drawn from the excavations at Beth Shan, Beth Shemesh and Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. Complete ceramic forms and some of the fine objects were taken from specific tomb contexts: Beth Shan Tomb 42 (LB I), Gibeon Tomb 10 (LB IIA), Beth Shan Tombs 219 and 90 (LBIIB-Ir I), and Tell es-Sa'idiyeh cemetery (LBIIB-Ir I). The tombs together constitute less than half of the cited material below. Almost all the remaining artifacts, with the exception of one or two outstanding pieces from Beth Shemesh StatumIV, are from strata IX-VII Beth Shan, dated to fourteenth-thirteenth centuries. In particular, we focused on the material from the important Egyptian/Canaanite temple. Be aware that Beth Shan is a highly egyptianize site so that it better reflects the cultural mix of many large sites in the lowlands of southern Palestine (Tell el-Farah S, Tell el-Ajjul, Lachish and Megiddo) and the greater Jordan valley (Tell es-Sa'idiyeh and Deir Alla) than other inland or more northern sites (Hazor).

SETTLEMENT PATTERNS

There is a definite decrease in occupied settlements in the Late Bronze Age from the previous Middle Bronze period. Surveys and excavations appear to confirm that the hill country region lacked a sedentary population except at a few major sites (e.g. Shechem or Tell Beit Mirsim). For example, Tell es-Sultan is abandoned by Late Bronze II; Gibeon show no sedentary occupation in the Late Bronze period though a single tomb was used in Late Bronze IIA.

Many small and minor sites in the coastal region appear also to be abandoned, and very few new sites (e.g. Tell Abu Hawam) are founded.

(Information from Boston University Website.)

Late Iron Age

Late Bronze and Iron Age