scholarly journals The Iron Age I–II Transition in the Northern Levant: An Emerging Consensus?

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 325-351
Author(s):  
Timothy Harrison
Keyword(s):  
Iron Age ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Local History ◽  
Iron Age Ii ◽  
Iron Age I ◽  
Tell Tayinat ◽  
Southeast Anatolia

The development of a refined, and widely accepted, chronological and cultural sequence has eluded the study of the Iron Age Northern Levant, despite more than a century of archaeological exploration and research. The renewed investigations at Tell Tayinat (ancient Kunulua), capital of the Neo-Hittite Kingdom of Palastin/Walastin and scene of large-scale excavations by the Syrian-Hittite Expedition in the 1930s, have resulted in a tightly constructed stratigraphic and chronological cultural sequence, or “local history,” for this period. This refined “Amuq Sequence” indicates a number of culturally and historically significant transitions, including the transition from the Iron Age I to the Iron Age II, ca. 900 BCE, and it offers the prospect of forging a consensus regarding the cultural and chronological periodization of the broader Iron Age Northern Levant and Southeast Anatolia.

Late second–early first millennium BC abrupt climate changes in coastal Syria and their possible significance for the history of the Eastern Mediterranean

2010 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Kaniewski ◽  
E. Paulissen ◽  
E. Van Campo ◽  
H. Weiss ◽  
T. Otto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
Environmental History ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Eastern Mediterranean ◽  
Capital City ◽  
Early Iron Age ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Alluvial Deposits ◽  
Iron Age I

AbstractThe alluvial deposits near Gibala-Tell Tweini provide a unique record of environmental history and food availability estimates covering the Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age. The refined pollen-derived climatic proxy suggests that drier climatic conditions occurred in the Mediterranean belt of Syria from the late 13th/early 12th centuries BC to the 9th century BC. This period corresponds with the time frame of the Late Bronze Age collapse and the subsequent Dark Age. The abrupt climate change at the end of the Late Bronze Age caused region-wide crop failures, leading towards socio-economic crises and unsustainability, forcing regional habitat-tracking. Archaeological data show that the first conflagration of Gibala occurred simultaneously with the destruction of the capital city Ugarit currently dated between 1194 and 1175 BC. Gibala redeveloped shortly after this destruction, with large-scale urbanization visible in two main architectural phases during the Early Iron Age I. The later Iron Age I city was destroyed during a second conflagration, which is radiocarbon-dated at circa 2950 cal yr BP. The data from Gibala-Tell Tweini provide evidence in support of the drought hypothesis as a triggering factor behind the Late Bronze Age collapse in the Eastern Mediterranean.

scholarly journals Philistine Cult and Religion According to Archaeological Evidence

Religions ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 74
Author(s):  
David Ben-Shlomo
Keyword(s):  
Iron Age ◽  
Popular Religion ◽  
Archaeological Evidence ◽  
Cultural Elements ◽  
Iron Age Ii ◽  
Iron Age I ◽  
Textual Records

The paper surveys and discusses the updated archaeological evidence for Philistine cult and religion, and cult and religion in Philistia during the Iron Age. The evidence can be related to public or official cult, represented in temple and shrine structures, and to that coming from households, representing possibly more popular religion. The evidence of public cult, so far mostly from peripheral sites, includes largely cultural elements linked with the local Canaanite cult and religion. Yet, within households at the Philistine cities there is more evidence for cultic elements of Aegean affinity during Iron Age I. In particular, figurines and ceramic figurative vessels and objects will be discussed. It seems that the Philistine religion may have retained certain distinctive elements also during Iron Age II. Nevertheless, it is still difficult to reconstruct the details of the nature of the Philistine religion due to the limited amount of evidence and lack of textual records.

scholarly journals The Iron Age I in the Northern Levant: New perspectives from Lebanon

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanan Charaf
Keyword(s):  
Material Culture ◽  
Bronze Age ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Smooth Transition ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Late Bronze Age ◽  
Southern Levant ◽  
Local Characteristics ◽  
Iron Age I ◽  
Tell Tayinat

The beginning of the Iron Age in the Levant has been for the past three decades the focus of intense studies and debates. The main reason that had triggered this interest is the turmoil characterizing the end of the Late Bronze Age coupled with the migration of newcomers dubbed the “Sea People” to the coastal Levant. This phenomenon has been studied to a length in the southern Levant where evidence of destructions followed by a new culture is attested on many coastal sites. However, in neighboring Lebanon, few studies focused on this period mainly due to the paucity of archaeological sites dating to the end of the Late Bronze Age/beginning of the Iron Age. In recent years, remains uncovered at major sites such as Tell Arqa (Irqata of the Amarna Tablets), Sarepta, Tyre, or Kamid el-Loz (Kumidi of the Amarna Tablets) gave no evidence for destructions at the end of the Late Bronze Age in this country. On the contrary, the architectural and material culture found at sites such as Tell Arqa and Sarepta points to a smooth transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age. While the exposed architecture is usually flimsy and is characterized by a widespread use of pits and silos (a phenomenon equally observed on other neighboring sites such as Tell Afis in Syria or Tell Tayinat in Turkey), the pottery still retains old characteristics; yet integrated into a few new shapes and fabrics. The patterns of archaism observed in the material cultural in Lebanon challenges the established understanding of the Iron Age I in the southern Levant where it is characterized as a period of turmoil and transformation.This presentation analyses the architectural and material characteristics of the end of the Late Bronze Age I/beginning of the Iron Age I in Lebanon with the aim at isolating both local characteristics and regional influences.

scholarly journals 14C Dates and the Iron Age Chronology of Israel: A Response

Radiocarbon ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amihai Mazar ◽  
Christopher Bronk Ramsey
Keyword(s):  
Iron Age ◽  
Eastern Mediterranean ◽  
Bayesian Models ◽  
Age Dating ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Iron Age Ii ◽  
Iron Age I ◽  
Mediterranean Archaeology ◽  
Historical Periods ◽  
Probability Range

Boaretto et al. (2005) published 68 radiocarbon dates relating to 30 samples from 10 Iron Age sites in Israel as part of their Early Iron Age Dating Project. Though the main goal of their paper was an interlaboratory comparison, they also presented results of Bayesian models, calculating the transition from Iron Age I to Iron Age II in Israel to be about 900 BCE instead of the conventional date of about 1000 BCE. Since this date has great importance for all of Eastern Mediterranean archaeology, in this paper we examine the results in light of the dates published in the above-mentioned article. Our paper was revised in light of new data and interpretations published by Sharon et al. (2007).Following a survey of the contexts and specific results at each site, we present several Bayesian models. Model C2 suggests the date range of 961–942 BCE (68% probability) for the transition from Iron Age I to Iron Age II, while Model C3 indicates a somewhat later date of 948–919 BCE (compare the date 992–961 BCE calculated at Tel Rehov for the same transition). In our Model D, we calculated this transition date at Megiddo as taking place between 967–943 BCE. Finally, we calculated the range of dates of major destruction levels marking the end of the Iron Age I, with the following results: Megiddo VIA: 1010–943 BCE; Yoqne'am XVII: 1045–997 BCE; Tell Qasile X: 1039–979 BCE; Tel Hadar: 1043–979 BCE (all in the 68.2% probability range). Figure 4 indicates that the transition between Iron I and II probably occurred between these above-mentioned destruction events and the dates achieved in our Models C2 or C3, namely during the first half of the 10th century BCE.This study emphasizes the sensitivity of Bayesian models to outliers, and for reducing or adding dates from the models. This sensitivity should be taken into account when using Bayesian models for interpreting radiometric dates in relation to subtle chronological questions in historical periods.

scholarly journals The “United Monarchy” on the Ground: The Disruptive Character of the Iron Age I–II Transition and the Nature of Political Transformations

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 15-67
Author(s):  
Avraham Faust
Keyword(s):  
State Formation ◽  
Iron Age ◽  
Settlement Patterns ◽  
Social Complexity ◽  
Formation Processes ◽  
Iron Age Ii ◽  
Political Transformations ◽  
United Monarchy ◽  
Iron Age I ◽  
The Common

It is commonly agreed that the Iron Age I–II transition was gradual and that processes of social complexity initiated in the Iron Age I simply matured in the Iron Age II. The emergence of Levantine kingdoms – whether the so-called “United Monarchy” (i.e., the highland polity) or other polities – was therefore seen as an outcome of this gradual maturation, even if the date of their emergence is hotly debated. The present paper challenges both the perceived gradual nature of Iron Age complexity and the dated understanding of state formation processes that lies behind the common scholarly reconstructions of Iron Age political developments. Instead, the paper shows that the Iron Age I–II transition was troubled and was accompanied by drastic changes in many parameters, whether settlement patterns, settlement forms, or various material traits. Acknowledging these transformations is therefore the first step in understanding the process through which local kingdoms emerged.

The History of the Judahite Bench Tomb

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Suriano
Keyword(s):  
Iron Age ◽  
Hebrew Bible ◽  
Cultural Practices ◽  
Seventh Century ◽  
Mortuary Practices ◽  
Iron Age Ii ◽  
Gradual Development ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Dead ◽  
Insight Into

The history of the Judahite bench tomb provides important insight into the meaning of mortuary practices, and by extension, death in the Hebrew Bible. The bench tomb appeared in Judah during Iron Age II. Although it included certain burial features that appear earlier in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, such as burial benches, and the use of caves for extramural burials, the Judahite bench tomb uniquely incorporated these features into a specific plan that emulated domestic structures and facilitated multigenerational burials. During the seventh century, and continuing into the sixth, the bench tombs become popular in Jerusalem. The history of this type of burial shows a gradual development of cultural practices that were meant to control death and contain the dead. It is possible to observe within these cultural practices the tomb as a means of constructing identity for both the dead and the living.

The Element שלם in Hebrew Personal Names in the Land of Israel during the Iron Age ii Period

2015 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 567-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitka R. Golub
Keyword(s):  
Iron Age ◽  
Political Affiliation ◽  
Personal Names ◽  
Iron Age Ii ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Deceased Child ◽  
Divine Name ◽  
Biblical Sources ◽  
Land Of Israel

In this study, I investigated all personal names with the element שלם in the Land of Israel during the Iron Age ii period. I collected the names from archaeological and biblical sources, analyzed and compared their distribution according to geography, chronology, and political affiliation. The results show that while שלם is a popular element in Judah from the eighth to the early sixth centuries, it is absent from Israel. The element שלם in unvocalized names from archaeological sources is interpreted mostly as ‘replacement, substitute’ (for the deceased child). However, the popularity of the element שלם solely in Judah may indicate that שלם was used more often than we assume as a divine name referring to YHWH, as do all other Judean popular names. In addition, the comparison between the names from archaeological and biblical sources may be interpreted to indicate that the Bible reflects Judean and not Israelite onomastic traditions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document