Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer: Bronze Age Cities in Iron Age Context

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Yosef Garfinkel ◽  
Michael Pietsch

Abstract The historical King Solomon has been discussed and debated by many scholars over the years. It is interesting, however, to see that the historicity of the city list of Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer has been accepted by traditional and more radical scholars alike, who have suggested historical contexts in the 10th, 9th, or 8th century BCE for it. In this article we examine the list from a primarily literary point of view, placing it in the broader context of royal ideology in the ancient Near East and arguing that it may preserve memories of great cities from the Canaanite era.

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 689-704
Author(s):  
Pertev Basri ◽  
Dan Lawrence

Investigating how different forms of inequality arose and were sustained through time is key to understanding the emergence of complex social systems. Due to its long-term perspective, archaeology has much to contribute to this discussion. However, comparing inequality in different societies through time, especially in prehistory, is difficult because comparable metrics of value are not available. Here we use a recently developed technique which assumes a correlation between household size and household wealth to investigate inequality in the ancient Near East. If this assumption is correct, our results show that inequality increased from the Neolithic to the Iron Age, and we link this increase to changing forms of social and political organization. We see a step change in levels of inequality around the time of the emergence of urban sites at the beginning of the Bronze Age. However, urban and rural sites were similarly unequal, suggesting that outside the elite, the inhabitants of each encompassed a similar range of wealth levels. The situation changes during the Iron Age, when inequality in urban environments increases and rural sites become more equal.


1961 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 20-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. B. Ward-Perkins

The roads and gates described in the previous section are of very varied dates, and many of them were in use over a long period. They have been described first because they constitute the essential framework for any serious topographical study of Veii. Within this framework the city developed, and in this and the following sections will be found described, period by period, the evidence for that development, from the first establishment of Veii in Villanovan times down to its final abandonment in late antiquity.Whatever the precise relationship of the Villanovan to the succeeding phases of the Early Iron Age in central Italy in terms of politics, race or language, it is abundantly clear that it was within the Villanovan period that the main lines of the social and topographical framework of historical Etruria first took shape. Veii is no exception. Apart from sporadic material that may have been dropped by Neolithic or Bronze Age hunters, there is nothing from the Ager Veientanus to suggest that it was the scene of any substantial settlement before the occupation of Veii itself by groups of Early Iron Age farmers, a part of whose material equipment relates them unequivocally to the Villanovan peoples of coastal and central Etruria.


1996 ◽  
Vol 100 (1) ◽  
pp. 161 ◽  
Author(s):  
John G. Younger ◽  
Ingo Pini ◽  
Piera Ferioli ◽  
Enrica Fiandra ◽  
Gian Giacomo Fissore ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-199
Author(s):  
Philip J. Boyes

Ugarit was a highly cosmopolitan, multilingual and multiscript city at the intersection of several major Late Bronze Age political and cultural spheres of influence. In the thirteenth centurybc, the city adopted a new alphabetic cuneiform writing system in the local language for certain uses alongside the Akkadian language, script and scribal practices that were standard throughout the Near East. Previous research has seen this as ‘vernacularization’, in response to the city's encounter with Mesopotamian culture. Recent improvements in our understanding of the date of Ugarit's adoption of alphabetic cuneiform render this unlikely, and this paper instead argues that we should see this vernacularization as part of Ugarit's negotiation of, and resistance to, their encounter with Hittite imperialism. Furthermore, it stands as a specific, Ugaritian, manifestation of similar trends apparent across a number of East Mediterranean societies in response to the economic and political globalism of Late Bronze Age élite culture. As such, these changes in Ugaritian scribal practice have implications for our wider understanding of the end of the Late Bronze Age.


2009 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuel Pfoh

AbstractFollowing the discussion presented in an article by R. Westbrook on patronage in the ancient Near East (JESHO 48/2, 2005), the aim of this paper is to continue with the discussion as well as to address some of the views on the topic regarding Syria-Palestine during the Late Bronze Age, using examples from the Amarna letters and Hittite treaties. Some of the critical questions that should be addressed in further discussions on the subject are related to the socio-political nature of patronage and its relationship to kinship ties in society, and why and how patronage relationships are established in society. Après l'étude du R. Westbrook sur l'évidence du patronage dans le Proche-Orient ancien, publié dans ce journal (JESHO 48/2, 2005), on veut continuer avec la discussion du thème mais donner aussi quelques révisions pour la Syrie-Palestine du l'âge du Bronce Récent à partir de exemples dans les lettres d'Amarna et les traités hittites. Questions fondamentales qu'on doit traiter sont: la nature socio-politique du patronage et son rapport avec la parenté dans la société; et pourquoi et comment les liens de patronage sont établis dans la société.


1972 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 179-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Burney

If there is one aspect of life in the ancient Near East which may be taken as a common factor between lands and cities so far removed in space and time as Sumer and Urartu, Eridu and Van, it is irrigation. This is a subject crying out for more research, especially on the ground. Here too is a link between Seton Lloyd's excavations at Eridu and in the Diyala region, his publication of Sennacherib's acqueduct and his later interest in Urartu. The writer can claim first-hand knowledge only of the last. Without Seton Lloyd's encouragement in the Institute at Ankara and likewise during the weeks spent as an assistant during the first season's excavations at Beycesultan, the writer would scarcely have set out on his first archaeological survey in northern Anatolia, followed by that in the Pontic region of Tokat and Amasya (1955). These two surveys were but the prelude to those of 1956 and 1957 in eastern Anatolia. These, undertaken initially in the expectation of discovering mounds of the Bronze Age and earlier periods, became instead largely a revelation of the great number of Urartian sites, including numerous fortresses recognizable as such from their surface remains.


Author(s):  
RUSLAN TSAKANYAN

In the paper are discussed the issues of the Urartian King Rusa II/III’s (685-660(?) B.C.) campaign to Transeuphratian region, the circumstances of the Assyrian conquest of the country Šubria by King Esarhaddon (681-669 B.C.), the specification of the year of the medians anti-Assyrian rebellion as well. In the result of the simultaneous research of Ancient Near East history, the author came to conclusion that the campaigns had the tendency to prevent the possibility of the attack of the “House of Torgome” («Տուն Թորգոմա», «Bêṭ-Tôgarmā/Torgāmā») (by the reign of Esarhaddon new dangers had appeared which directed Assyrian attention once again to these regions). The latter had occupied serious position in the Eastern Asia Minor at the close of the VIII century and now was trying to extend the influence in the East and in the South-East posing a threat for Assyria and Urartu. And only from such point of view it is possible to consider the aforementioned campaigns. As to the medians anti-Assyrian rebellion during researches the author came to conclusion that it took place after the Assyrian conquest of Šubria in the same year in 672 B.C.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document