Alexander Fantalkin

Low Chronology and Greek Protogeometric and Geometric Pottery in the Southern Levant

Abstract The article deals with the absolute chronology of the Iron Age in the Southern Levant and the Aegean world. It first discusses the chronological gap between the conventional dating of Protogeometric pottery in Greece, and its appearance in the Southern Levantine assemblages. The question then asked is whether the Low Chronology recently proposed by Finkelstein will free us from the difficulties raised by the prevailing dating. A brief examination shows that one cannot use the accepted dating of Greek Protogeometric and Geometric pottery to support the ‘Finkelstein correction’, but rather his Low Chronology provides, for the first time, a basis for the absolute chronology of the Dark Age in Greece. At the end the article proposes a common denominator to reconcile the differences of opinion between major chronological approaches. These may be explained by the differences in the length of existence of the relevant strata.

Iron Age Mediterranean Chronology: A Rejoinder

This article is a rejoinder to a recent paper in this journal by van der Plicht et al. (2009) who use radiocarbon determinations from several sites in Israel, Italy, Spain, and Tunisia to advocate a High Chronology system for the entire Med- iterranean Basin. We contend that they reached mistaken conclusions due to problematic selection of sites and data. We argue that a reliable way to provide absolute dates for the Iron Age in the central and western Mediterranean is by employing a com- bination of well-identified Greek pottery found in well-stratified sites and radiometric results from short-lived samples. For the time being, this combination exists only in the Levant, and provides an anchor for Greek chronology, which supports the Conventional Chronology for the Aegean Basin, which corresponds to the Low Chronology in the Levant.

Khirbet Qeiyafa: An Unsensational Archaeological and Historical Interpretation

Abstract The article deals with the finds at the late Iron I settlement of Khirbet Qeiyafa, a site overlooking the Valley of Elah in the Shephelah. It points out the methodological shortcomings in both field work and interpretation of the finds. It then turns to several issues related to the finds: the identity of the inhabitants, their territorial affiliation and the possibility of identifying Khirbet Qeiyafa with sites mentioned in the Bible and in the Shoshenq I list.

Towards an Absolute Chronology for the Aegean Iron Age: New Radiocarbon Dates from Lefkandi, Kalapodi and Corinth

The relative chronology of the Aegean Iron Age is robust. It is based on minute stylistic changes in the Submycenaean, Protogeometric and Geometric styles and their sub-phases. Yet, the absolute chronology of the time-span between the final stages of Late Helladic IIIC in the late second millennium BCE and the archaic colonization of Italy and Sicily toward the end of the 8th century BCE lacks archaeological contexts that can be directly related to events carrying absolute dates mentioned in Egyptian/Near Eastern historical sources, or to well-dated Egyptian/Near Eastern rulers. The small number of radiocarbon dates available for this time span is not sufficient to establish an absolute chronological sequence. Here we present a new set of short-lived radiocarbon dates from the sites of Lefkandi, Kalapodi and Corinth in Greece. We focus on the crucial transition from the Submycenaean to the Protogeometric periods. This transition is placed in the late 11th century BCE according to the Conventional Aegean Chronology and in the late 12th century BCE according to the High Aegean Chronology. Our results place it in the second half of the 11th century BCE.

RE-DISCOVERING THE IRON AGE FORTRESS AT TELL QUDADI IN THE CONTEXT OF NEO-ASSYRIAN IMPERIALISTIC POLICIES

Abstract Tell Qudadi (Tell esh-Shuna) is located on the northern bank of the mouth of the Yarkon River. A preliminary trial excavation was conducted at the site in October 1937 under the direction of P. L. O. Guy, followed by extensive excavations carried out from November 1937–March 1938 on behalf of the Hebrew University, headed by E. L. Sukenik and S. Yeivin with the participation of N. Avigad. An impressive Iron Age fortress with two architectural phases was reported to have been found in the excavations. The excavators dated the first phase of the fortress to the 10th/9th century BCE, whereas the second phase, in their opinion, existed from the latter part of the 9th century BCE until 732 BCE, when it was destroyed as a result of the military campaign led by Tiglath-pileser III. Although the excavations were conducted some seventy years ago, the findings were never published. Considering the importance of the site to the history of the Land of Israel during the Iron Age, and as a result of cooperation between the Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University, it was recently decided to publish the final excavation report. The preliminary study has produced interesting results that challenge the insights gained by the excavators. The ceramic assemblage is now thought to indicate that the site was not established before the second half of the 8th century BCE. Moreover, the ceramic evidence made it possible to determine that the fortress existed during the neo-Assyrian period. It seems reasonable to assume that the Tell Qudadi fortress was one of a series of neo-Assyrian fortresses constructed along the coast of the Land of Israel (some of which were erected at the mouths of rivers) at the end of the 8th and in the first half of the 7th century BCE.

The Canonization of the Pentateuch: When and Why? (Part I)

The canonization of the Pentateuch has preoccupied scholars from different disciplines from antiquity to the present. However, two major questions still require an explanation: when did it happen and why did it happen? In this two-part article an attempt has been made to clarify these issues. Based on an interdisciplinary approach, where the insights of redaction criticism are merged with archaeologically-supported historical analysis, we suggest that the inception of the Torah-canonization should be viewed within the framework of the geopolitical transformation that characterized the first half of the fourth century BCE, when, following a major Egyptian rebellion, Egypt was no longer a part of the Persian Empire, while southern Palestine became the empire’s frontier for the first time in more than a century of Achaemenid rule. The canonization of the essentially anti-Egyptian version of the Torah in the early fourth century BCE should be considered as a conscious response of Jerusalem’s priestly circles to this new reality, signaling to the imperial authorities that they are dealing with loyal subjects that consider Egypt as a world of chaos, an antithesis to the world of cosmic order, so central to Persian imperial self-understanding. La canonisation du Pentateuque a préoccupé les chercheurs depuis l’antiquité jusqu’à nos jours. Deux questions demeurent cependant: quand et pourquoi s’est-elle produite? Cette étude en deux parties tente de répondre à ces questions. A partir d’une approche interdisciplinaire, qui combine les résultats de la critique rédactionnelle avec une analyse historique fondée sur les données archéologiques, la solution suivante est proposée: le début de la canonisation de la Torah se situe dans le cadre des changements géopolitiques qui marquent la première moitié du 4ème siècle av. J.-C. A la suite d’un vaste soulèvement, l’Egypte ne faisait plus partie de l’empire perse, alors que la Palestine du sud formait, pour la première fois depuis plus d’un siècle de domination achéménide, la frontière méridionale de l’empire. La canonisation de la version essentiellement anti-égyptienne de la Torah du début du 4ème siècle doit être comprise comme une réponse consciente des prêtres de Jérusalem à cette nouvelle situation politique. Ils indiquent ainsi à l’administration perse qu’ils sont des sujets loyaux qui considèrent l’Egypte comme une puissance du chaos, à l’inverse de l’ordre cosmique qui caractérise l’auto-compréhension de l’empire perse. Die Kanonisierung des Pentateuch hat Gelehrte verschiedener Disziplinen von der Antike bis in die Gegenwart beschäftigt. Dennoch harren zwei wichtige Fragen noch immer der Erklärung: Wann hat sie sich ereignet, und warum? In diesem zweiteiligen Artikel wird der Versuch unternommen, diese Fragen zu klären. Basierend auf einem interdisziplinären Ansatz, der die Erkenntnisse der Redaktionskritik mit einer archäologisch fundierten historischen Analyse verbindet, schlagen die Autoren vor, dass der Beginn der Kanonisierung der Tora im Zusammenhang der geopolitischen Veränderungen zu sehen ist, welche die erste Hälfte des 4. Jh. v. Chr. prägten. Ägypten war in Folge eines größeren Aufstandes nicht mehr Teil des persischen Großreiches, während der Süden Palästinas erstmals nach mehr als einem Jahrhundert achämenidischer Herrschaft die Reichsgrenze bildete. Die Kanonisierung der wesentlich anti-ägyptischen Version der Tora im frühen 4. Jh. v.Chr. kann als eine bewusste Antwort der Jerusalemer Priester auf diese neue politische Situation verstanden werden. Diese signalisieren der persischen Verwaltung, dass sie loyale Untertanen sind, die Ägypten als eine Chaosmacht betrachten, als Gegenbild der kosmischen Ordnung, die für das Selbstverständnis des persischen Reiches zentral ist.

Egyptian Coarse Ware in Early Islamic Palestine: Between Commerce and Migration

This study offers a critical re-evaluation of chronological aspects and distribution patterns concerning two main types of Egyptian coarse ware (Red-Brown Ovoid Amphorae and Coarse Ware Basins) identified in Early Islamic assemblages (eighth to tenth centuries AD) in Palestine. While the distribution of Egyptian amphorae is explained in socio-economic terms as reflecting normal trade relations, the appearance of Egyptian coarse ware basins in a limited number of local assemblages may imply the actual presence of Egyptian migrants (merchants or soldiers).

The Earliest Greek Import in the Iron Age Levant

This article presents a fragment of a late Submycenaean/early Protogeometric wavy-band deep bowl found at the Philistine site of Tell es-Safi/Gath, Israel. Produced in the Argolid, this item appears to be, as of now, the earliest Iron Age Greek import to the Levant. This unique find presents an opportunity to review some problems relating to the chronological correlation between the Aegean and the Levant in the early 1st millennium BC, as well as the cultural contacts in the eastern Mediterranean during this period.

The Final Destruction of Beth Shemesh and the Pax Assyriaca in the Judahite Shephelah: An Alternative View

Abstract Recently, Bunimovitz and Lederman suggested that the final destruction of Beth Shemesh illuminates Assyrian policies in the Judahite Shephelah. According to their reconstruction of new data unearthed at Beth Shemesh, the Judahite Shephelah was devastated and depopulated during the pax Assyriaca. This study questions Bunimovitz and Ledermans reconstruction from both the archaeological and historical perspectives. It is suggested that the renewal of the Shephelah, which might have already began in the days of Manasseh, shows signs of cooperation between Judah and Ekron under both the pax Assyriaca and the pax Aegyptiaca, rather than the other way round. This fruitful cooperation was halted as a result of Babylonian destructions, as reflected inter alia in the renewed excavations of Beth Shemesh.

A Late Iron Age Fortress North of Jerusalem

Studies dealing with the defensive system of the Kingdom of Judah in the Late Iron Age have mentioned the fortress excavated at the French Hill, north of Jerusalem (the possibility of its use during the Persian period has also been raised). The plan and finds from this fortress have never been published, and its description has appeared in a very preliminary form. This article is the final report of the excavation carried out 33 years ago by Professor Ora Negbi, to whom we dedicate this article. Aside from a fully detailed publication of the fortresss architectural plan and the finds retrieved, our objectives are to set the chronological framework on the basis of the finds, suggest a possible geographical-historical identification according to biblical sources, and attempt to reconstruct the defensive system of the Judaean kingdoms capital-Jerusalem.