Near Eastern Helmets of the Iron Age

Author(s):  
Tamas Dezso
Keyword(s):  
Iron Age ◽  
Author(s):  
Avraham Faust

The term “biblical archaeology” has meant different things to different people at different times. During most of its history, the term was used broadly and included archaeological (and archaeology-related) activities in the biblical lands, mainly the Near East but even beyond it, from prehistory to the medieval period. Later, the term was seen as parochial, narrow, and religiously loaded, and many felt uncomfortable using it, sometimes calling for a “secular archaeology” (e.g., William Dever), and preferring instead terms such as “Syria-Palestinian archaeology,” “Near Eastern archaeology,” or “archaeology of the Levant.” The change has also been connected with the decrease in the historical value attributed to the biblical narratives, and to political correctness. The term, nevertheless, is still widely used, and many scholars speak today about “new biblical archaeology.” Geographically, the new term is narrower, covering mainly the Land of Israel (also known as the southern Levant, Palestine, or the Holy Land; roughly covering the area of modern Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority). Chronologically, it still covers a long period, but a difference exists between Israeli usage and American/European usage. Both “groups” begin the era with the start of the Bronze Age (although all agree that there was nothing “biblical” in those periods). For Israeli scholars, however, the biblical period refers to the time covered in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), and it ends by the Late Iron Age, or the Persian period. For most American and European scholars, especially in the past, the term embraced the Hellenistic period, the Roman period, and perhaps even the Byzantine period. Today, however, scholars specialize either in the early periods (Bronze and Iron Ages) or in the later (Hellenistic-Byzantine) periods, and the term “biblical archaeology” is becoming synonymous with the Bronze and Iron Ages (including the Persian period). Indeed, these are the periods that will receive most attention here. Although originally the “child” of biblical studies and archaeology, in its current usage the term is not necessarily connected with the Bible; rather, it relates to studies of a certain era in a certain region. Due to the wide definitions of biblical archaeology, and in light of the differences in meanings associated with it, the boundaries between biblical archaeology and other disciplines are not always clear cut, and they have changed over the course of the discipline’s history. Therefore, the following sections will address some works that are not archaeological in nature. Notably, this article will usually not refer to excavation reports or technical ceramic studies.


One major challenge of the study of ancient Iran is that it does not exist in Western academia as a discrete field of study. Prehistory, for example, which ends in the 3rd millennium in Elam but persists into the 1st millennium bce elsewhere on the Iranian plateau, has been studied primarily by anthropologists, the Iron Age by Assyriologists, the Parthians by classical archaeologists, and the Sasanians by scholars of Iranian studies. As a result, ancient Iran does not belong to any individual academic discipline, and in the context of Near Eastern studies, perhaps its most obvious home, it has been treated largely as an ancillary field. Thus Iran has seen less archaeological fieldwork, including excavation, regional survey, and study of standing architectural remains, than other parts of the Near East. This problem has been further compounded by the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which effectively barred foreign archaeologists from the country and severed contacts between them and their Iranian colleagues. This situation has improved in recent decades, but there are nevertheless relatively few scholars working on ancient Iran and comparatively little scholarship on its architecture, especially compared to Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Egypt, or the Mediterranean. To study Iranian architecture, therefore, it is necessary to extract relevant examples from archaeological reports, both preliminary and final. This is especially true for prehistoric periods before the advent of stone masonry, but even for the Sasanian period most architectural scholarship documents individual sites or buildings. The titles listed here thus provide only the raw material for studying ancient Iranian architecture. This bibliography is dedicated to the memory of David Stronach (b. 1931–d. 2020), a prolific and consummate archaeologist and scholar whose contributions to the study of Iranian architecture have been enormous.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-28
Author(s):  
Eleonora Pappalardo

This paper presents the preliminary results of the study carried out by the author on a precise class of materials: Protogeometric B pottery from the site of Prinias, in central Crete. The pottery comes from the excavations conducted in the necropolis of Siderospilia, used from the end of XII century BC until the VII/VI century. A large assemblage of material has been so far analyzed, mostly consisting on figured specimens. Among this, a particular class of pithoi, characterized by straight sides and mostly used as cinerary urns, stands out for its quite unique features, finding comparisons just in Knossos and in few other Cretan sites. The impressive figured repertoire adopted in decorating PGB pottery (850-800 BC) does not find comparisons in continental Greece and it seems to reflect some sort of mixed tendency between Near Eastern influences, involving Crete in Early Iron age, and Minoan background. Keywords: Prinias, Protogeometric B, Pithos, Crete, Aegean


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document