The Biblical Archaeologist - Vol.31, N.1

36 Pages·1968·3.97 MB·English

by  American Schools of Oriental Research

The
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST
Of
Publishedb y
THE AMERICAN SCHOOLS OF ORIENTAL RESEARCH
Jerusalem and Bagdad
Room 102, 6 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, Mass.
VOL. XXXI February,1 968 No. 1
;
a,.
I. 5. . "" ' .,-* 4 '.~' 5., . ,"li . .,?r'',,' .. , ? .'. ,
:;r,
(cid:127) (cid:127).
,.=
v
S. .fA~.~: ~
~
i ,!
",db ,**,""
Fig. 1. Hebrew ostraconf rom Arad, from about 600 B.C. It is addressedt o Eliashib.
Contents
Arad: Its Inscriptions and Temple, by Yohanan Aharoni ........................................2
Archaeological News and Views ........................................32
2 THE BIBLICALA RCHAEOLOGIST (Vol. XXXI
The Biblical Archaeologist is published quarterly (February, May, September, December)
by the American Schools of Oriental Research. Its purpose is to meet the need for a readable,
non-technical, yet thoroughly reliable account of archaeological discoveries as they relate to the
Bible.
Editor: Edward F. Campbell, Jr., with the assistance of Floyd V. Filson in New Testament
matters. Editorial correspondence should be sent to the editor at 800 West Belden Avenue, Chica-
go, Illinois, 60614.
Editorial Board: W. F. Albright, Johns Hopkins University; G. Ernest Wright, Harvard
University; Frank M. Cross, Jr., Harvard University; William G. Dever, Jerusalem.
Subscriptions: $3.00 per year, payable to the American Schools of Oriental Research,
625 Mt. Auburn Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138. Associate members of ASOR
receive the journal automatically. Ten or more subscriptions for group use, mailed and billed
to the same address, $2.00 per year apiece. Subscriptions run for the calendar year. In En-
gland: twenty-four shillings (24s.) per year, payable to B. H. Blackwell, Ltd., Broad Street,
Oxford. Back numbers: $1.00 per issue and $3.75 per volume, from the ASOR office. Please
make remittance with order.
The journal is indexed in Art Index, Index to Religious Periodical Literature, and at the end
of every fifth volume of the journal itself.
Second-class postage PAID at Cambridge, Massachusetts and additional offices.
Copyright by American Schools of Oriental Research, 1968.
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES or AMERICA, BY TRANSCRIPT PRINTING COMPANY
PETERBOROUGH, N. H.
Arad: Its Inscriptions and Temple
YOHANAANH ARONI
Hebrew University, Jerusalem
The bordera nd desert regions hardly constituteo ptimumc onditions
for human habitation.T hey definitely do, however,c reate ideal sites for
archaeologicainl vestigationt;h is is furtherf acilitatedb y man. Borderf ortress-
es and settlementsa re outpostso f civilizationa nd, as such, are the prime
targetso f maraudersa nd invaders.T his makes for numerouso ccupational
levels over shortp eriods,u suallyw ell coveredb y thick layerso f debris.P re-
servationo f finds is aided by arid conditionsa nd fine-grainedw ind-borne
loess soil, which quickly coversa site.
These, togetherw ith the importanceo f ancientA rad in its heyday,a re
the reasonf or its singulara nd speciali nterest.T hey accountf or the remark-
able stateo f the remainsf, or the detaileds tratigraphya,n d for the astonishing
yield of inscriptionsF. or the firstt ime in Palestiniana rchaeologym, osto f the
strataa re accompaniedb y literaryr emains,c ontributingm uch towardst heir
interpretatioann d chronology.
As often with excavationsh, ere no simples olutiono r easy corroboration
of the writtenm ateriali s readilya t hand. Realityi s alwaysm uch morec om-
plicatedt han historicalr aw materialss eem to indicate.I ndeed,a fter five sea-
sons of excavations,'t he "Kingo f Arad who dwelt in the Negeb" (Num.
1. The five seasons of excavations at Arad were carried out during 1962-67 on behalf of the
Hebrew University, the Israel Department of Antiquities and the Israel Exploration Society.
The University of North Carolina joined these institutions for the fifth season, when Prof.
B. Boyd served as co-director with the author. Much aid was also given by the Arad Develop-
ment Project, the Israel Museum, the Haaretz Museum (Tel Aviv), the Wenner-Gren Found-
ation and other institutions. Photographs published here were made by J. Schweig (6, 9-11,
13, 17), H. Burger (7-8, 16), D. Harris (5) and the author. The plans were drawn by M.
Feist and P. Zavazki.
1968, 1) THE BIBLICALA RCHAEOLOGIST 3
21:1) has become a very real problem. In contrast, the Israelite city, hardly
mentioned at all in the Bible, has emerged as a place of unique importance.
An enigmatic passage mentioning the "Negeb of Arad" (Jud. 1:16) is now
revealed to hold a totally unexpected meaning, intimately connected with
the unanticipated find, on the site, of an Israelite temple from the period of
the monarchy. This is the first and only such temple discovered in scientific
excavations. In the present resume, our main aim is to dwell on this discovery
and on the Hebrew documents, and their historicale valuation.
The tell of Arad is comprised, virtually, of two settlements, differing in
character, area and period. Thus, the areas of excavation have been divided
between the author and Ruth Amiran, who is in charge of the excavation
and study of the earlier settlement. The latter was a large urban settlement
extending over an area of more than twenty acres, larger even than a city
like Megiddo. It was at its height in EB II (ca. 2,900 - 2,700 B.C.) and was
preceded by an open, scattered settlement from the Late Chalcolithic period
(ca. 3,400 - 3,150 B.C.) and by a preliminary phase of pit- and cave-
dwellers from the later part of the EB I (ca. 3,000 - 2,900 B.C.).
The EB II city was surrounded by a stone wall some eight and one-
quarter feet thick, with semicircular, projecting towers at regular intervals.
Since the major part of the city was never rebuilt after its destruction around
2700, the ruins were uncovered immediately below the modem surface. This
enabled us to lay bare a considerable section of a very early city with modest
means and remarkables peed.
The city was well planned, divided by lanes into various quarters. Most
surprising is the architecture of the dwellings, built according to a fixed and
consistent plan, justifying Ruth Amiran'su se of the term "AradH ouse." This
is a rectangular "broad house" with entrance on one of its long walls. The
floor was dug twelve to twenty inches into the loess soil, with two or three
steps leading down into the house. A door socket is often found at the left
side of the door-opening. Benches lined the walls and, in the center of the
room, one or more slabs were found, some apparently having been used as a
kind of table, and others, in the larger houses, as bases for wooden columns
supporting the roof. A unique clay model of such a house, found in one of
them, shows the roof to have been flat with raised edges, perhaps for the
collection of rainwater.
This architecture was previously known only in public buildings of
approximately this period, such as in the temples at Megiddo, Ai and En-
gedi. It is now obvious that it was, in general, the typical architecture of
Palestine in the early phases of the Early Bronze age.
The rich finds on the floors were also surprising. Outstanding were
many large store-jarss, ome still containing carbonizedg rain. Round and square
4 THE BIBLICALA RCHAEOLOGIST (Vol. XXXI
platformso f stone and brick apparentlys erved as foundations of large granar-
ies. It is obvious that agriculture was commonly practiced here. We may ask
whether the many stores were the answer of the ancient population to the
problem of frequent droughts,s o typical in this region even today.
Some of the pottery vessels show a lustrous red burnish; some are paint-
ed with red-browng eometricald esigns. Similar vessels are known mainly from
First Dynasty tombs in Egypt (especially Abydos), classified as foreign im-
ports from Palestine or Syria. Our finds indicate that Arad (if this indeed
was the name of the early city, which seems very doubtful) was one of the
centers of the manufacture and export of this ware. The manifold trade with
Egypt is also attested by Egyptian pottery found at Arad. These finds are of
much importancef or the chronology of the early periods and may have some
bearing on the existence and flourishing of the early city. What was involved
in this trade with Egypt and what was the raison d'etre of such a large city
in this semi-aridr egion? Still more surprisingi s the lack of any well or spring
in the vicinity. The water supply could come only from rainfall and runoff.
How did the inhabitants manage to overcome these obstacles in such an early
period? These are basic questions which still demand thorough investigation.
..(cid:127).,. .... .(cid:127)
,', hid
Fig. 2. The Iron age citadel mound, at the end of excavations.
The Later Settlement
After its complete destruction, before the termination of EB II, the site
lay deserted for over 1,500 years. Only towards the end of the second millen-
nium B.C. did the second chapter of settlement start, lacking all but a geo-
graphical relation to its predecessor.T he absence of any occupation during
the Canaanite period proper raises the difficult question of the "King of Arad"
in biblical tradition,a question to which we shall return later.
During the 11th century B.C., a small open village was founded on the
southeastern ridge of the ancient city (Stratum XII). We may suppose that
this was a settlement of the Kenites, who inhabited the Negeb of Arad ac-
cording to Judges 1:16. As we shall see, this Kenite village is of special
interest for the history of the Arad temple.
1968, 1) THE BIBLICALA RCHAEOLOGIST 5
In the 10th century, probably in the time of Solomon, a strong fortress
was erected on the site (Stratum XI), with an open settlement clustered
around it. This was virtually the charactero f the site for nearly 2,000 years;
only the rulers changed. After the period of the monarchy (Strata XI-VI),
the hill was occupied successively by fortresses of the Persian, Hellenistic
and Roman periods (Strata V-III). The Roman fortress fell into neglect
with the removal of the limes fortifications to the south (A.D. 106). It is
characteristico f the pax Romana that the fortress was neither destroyed nor
resettled, but disintegrated slowly. Only after the Moslem conquest was
the site reoccupied, its last phase being a sheikh's residence or a caravanserai
(Stratum II). Our latest stratum (I) is made up mainly of medieval tombs.
Ns..
rae
,.oo
T~Tt
Fig. 3. The 9th century solid wall superimposed on the 10th century casemate wall.
The Iron age fortress was a square of approximatelyf ifty meters (164
feet) on a side. In spite of its limited size, this was one of the major Israelite
strongholds in the south, comparable to Kadesh-barneaa nd Ezion-geber. It
was built on the main road descending to the Arabah and Edom, dominating
the southeastern border region of Judah, the biblical Negeb of Arad. Its
importance is indicated by its unusually strong fortifications.T he first fortress
(Stratum XI) was surrounded by a casemate wall of the standard measures:
the outer wall is about 1.60 m. (63 inches) thick, and the inner about 1.40 m.
(55 inches), with a two meter (80 inches) space between. The wall was pro-
vided with square projecting towers, one at each corner and two along the
6 THE BIBLICALA RCHAEOLOGIST (Vol. XXXI
sides between. The eastern casemate wall was even stronger,f or the gate was
on this side, near the northeastern corner. The gate tower projected about
twenty-six feet from the line of the wall and had three piers on each side. If
we add to it the room of the casemate wall behind, through which the entry-
way led, we have a gate of the general form of the typical Solomonic four-
piered gate. Its total length was about sixteen meters or fifty-two and one-
half feet (thirty-six cubits or six reeds?). A thick burnt level, which covered
the floor of the gateway, gives evidence of the violent destruction of the
Stratum XI fortress.
1".I. :
. ..i .
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "?
? '?,,(cid:127)''(cid:127)(cid:127) .. ,.".(cid:127).(cid:127)(cid:127) ,! '(cid:127) '4,'
.
...
... .(cid:127)O .
..........
'0..1..,,. . ... . ,,.x,(cid:127)
. ?
,
,.-. ,
Fig. 4. The 9th century zig zag wall. To its left are remnants of the 10th century towers and
house of the early Iron age settlement.
In Stratum X, the fortificationsw ere remodeled completely. A solid wall
about thirteen feet thick replaced the casematew all and was built in a unique
zig-zag manner with small indentations at fixed intervals (Fig. 4). The gate
was removed to the center of the eastern side. It passed between two towers
protruding about six and one-half feet from the line of the wall. A second,
outer wall, built in a similar manner but smaller, stood on the lower part of
the slope. On the western side, opposite the gate, a unique water tunnel was
discoveredb eneath the two walls, hewn into the rock to a depth of more than
six feet and covered with stone slabs. Superimposed above it was a postern,
about three and one-half feet high, built into the foundations of the solid
wall and also covered with large stone slabs. The water tunnel led into large,
plastered cisterns cut into the rock beneath the buildings of the citadel. What
was the source of water for this elaborate system, keeping in mind that the
only source in the vicinity was rainwater and runoff, and that the outlet of
1968, 1) THE BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST 7
the tunnel is at much too high a level to have conveyed water by sheer gravi-
ty? The only possible answer is that water was taken from the cisterns dotting
the entire region. We can imagine a row of water carriers, probably using
donkeys, daily bringing water and pouring it into the tunnel at its outer end.
Thus, the cisterns of the citadel could always be kept full to capacity without
disturbing daily routine within the citadel.
That the solid wall existed through four strata (X-VII) is apparently
due to its exceptional strength. In the later strata,h owever, additional parallel
lines were built inside the fortress, again giving it the appearance of a case-
mate-type fortification, the outer wall remaining the solid one. It seems im-
probable that the intention was to strengthen the foundations of such a
massive wall. We may assume, therefore, that the purpose was to enlarge the
top of the wall for the sake of warriors and equipment. In the last Iron age
stratum (VI), after the complete destruction of the solid wall, a new case-
mate wall was constructed with eight projecting towers, similar in plan to
the fortresso f Kadesh-barneaA. rad seems to be a good example of the changes
of the fortification system during the period of the monarchy. In the 10th
century B.C. the casemate wall was the common type of fortification.2A
casemate wall more than sixteen feet thick would also have furnished ade-
quate barracksa nd store rooms, taking full advantage of the limited means of
the kingdom. It seems that panic reigned after the conquests of Shishak and
Ben-hadad I. As far as we know, during the first half of the 9th century all
fortified cities of major importance were surrounded by massive, solid walls,
usually having projections and recesses, superimposed over the earlier case-
mate walls (e.g. at Hazor, Tell en-Nasbeh and Ezion-geber). Arad indicates
a reversion to the casemate type wall in the 8th century B.C.; indeed no
solid wall built after the 9th century has been discovered.3A fter all, this,
was the most utilitarian type of fortification, fitting a small kingdom such as
Judah. Moreover, the defenders of any wall were evidently considered the
most important factor and, therefore, the width of the top of the wall became
of prime importance.
Contrary to the alterations in the fortifications, the layout of the main
buildings within the citadel hardly changed at all in the six Iron age
strata (Fig. 5). The gate led into a courtyard of limited size. The two main
structures of the citadel were the temple and the storehouse, in its north-
western and northeastern corners, respectively. The main living quarters,
2. Y. Aharoni, BASOR No. 154 (May, 1959), pp. 35ff.; Y. Yadin, The Art of Warfare in Bibli-
cal Lands (1963), p. 322. However, it is doubtful whether this principle was absolute. It is
still the belief of the present writer that at Megiddo the solid wall originates in the 10th
cent. and was built together with the Solomonic gate.
3. Ramet Rahel may be an exception. There the inner casemate wall is surrounded by an outer
solid wall; cf. Aharoni et al., Ramet Rahel, Seasons 1961 and 1962 (1964), pp. 51ff., Fig. 6.
Here, however, it also had the function of a terrace wall supporting a large fill.
8 THE BIBLICALA RCHAEOLOGIST (Vol. XXXI
situated in the southern part of the citadel, were divided into some seven
units. Between these and the temple, west of the courtyard, were various
workshops with installations for distilling perfume, metal working and other
crafts.
The gate was near the northeasternc orner, but its exact position changed
from time to time. From Stratum IX on, it was transferredf rom the eastern
to the northern side and the visitor now had to pass through a corridorb e-
tween the storehouse and the temple. The intention may have been to re-
strict access to these two public buildings alone, while the rest of the citadel
remained out-of-boundst o travelers.
V,.,
+++..+A,
++ ++
++.o
i
'ra se'q ,? ' '. . . +:+ .. (cid:127) . . (!
:F3Owrte , poe-1.1,2r .. : s ???~ ~ i ,qq-
': +
'ti+i! i,,e +::L?(cid:127)'?!t + -., . . , . . ... -- ... .....: (cid:127) i :+(cid:127)+
.. ...
Fig. 5. Model of the citadel in Stratum VIII (late 8th cent.) prepared by the Israel Museum.
In reconstructing the plan of the citadel, we are assisted by a unique
find in Stratum IX, a stone seal with a peculiar design, apparently a repre-
sentation of the general layout of the fortress (Fig. 6). Visible are the wall,
the narrow corridorb etween the store to the right and the temple to the left,
the rectangular court and, behind it, the areas of the dwellings and work-
shops. The temple is depicted as a high, rounded structure. Had the temple
really a rounded roof, or is this only an artistic expression of its outstanding
importance?
In all seven Iron age strata (the six fortressesa nd the early settlement),
an abundance of vessels and implements was found in thick burnt levels.
This is the most detailed stratificationo f this period encountered so far in
1968, 1) THE BIBLICALA RCHAEOLOGIST 9
any Judean mound. The pottery range is defined between the 1lth century
(irregular hand-burnish) and the early 6th century B.C. (late Iron age types
identical with Lachish II, Tell Beit Mirsim A2, Ramat Rahel VA, etc.). More
over, for the destruction of the earliest and latest fortresses,w e have virtually
absolute dates. Pharoah Shishak mentions the fortress of Greater Arad (hqr
'rd rbt) among the places captured by him in the fifth year of Rehoboam
son of Solomon (ca. 920 B.C.). It is most plausible that the first fortress
(Stratum XI) was destroyed at this time. A large amount of pottery found in
the casemate wall, sealed by the superimposeds olid wall, is evidently one of
the best dated collections of this period (Figs. 7-8). On the other hand, the
last fortress was destroyed at the very end of the monarchy, probably. d...u. .r .in.g.
1wp~t~
mewI
A6~e
r;? iA
Fig. 6. Stone seal with general plan of the citadel; at the right, the seal's impression.
Nebuchadnezzar'sf irst campaign (ca. 598 B.C.). This is clearly indicated not
only by the pottery but also by the script and contents of the ostraca, as we
shall see below. Since in the intervening 320 years there are four more de-
struction levels, the possible error in their dating is minimal. These strati-
graphic considerations are, of course, of vital importance also for the dating
of the ostracaa nd the temple, to which we shall now turn.
The Ostraca
During the five seasons of excavation, over 200 ostraca were found, nearly
half Aramaic (from approximately4 00 B.C.) and the rest Hebrew, from the
time of the monarchy. This was not just a chance find, like at Samaria or
Lachish where a group of ostraca was found within one special room. The
ostraca, that is, sherds inscribed in ink, were found in various rooms and
strata,a nd they were a common phenomenon of the excavations.T here hardly
passed a week without the discoveryo f additionalo straca.
This epigraphic abundance, so very unusual in Palestine, demands an
explanation. The regional aridity is, of course, a major reason for their pre-
servation but certainly not the only one. It is becoming more and more prob-
able that in daily royal and military administration the use of sherds as a
10 THE BIBLICALA RCHAEOLOGIST (Vol. XXXI
cheap and easily available writing material was common. Since at Arad we
were uncovering not a city but a relatively small, though important citadel,
the presence of ostraca cannot be thought of as accidental. To this we may
add special precautions taken in our work so as to prevent the loss of sherds
with faint script, and to prevent their being scrubbed "clean" during the
usual sherd washing. One of the afternoon duties of our area supervisorw as
the "dipping" of the pottery. Every sherd was dipped into water and both
sides examined closely. During the work, the eyes of the excavators became
attuned to discerning ostracaa nd, towards the end, a good many were spotted
actually in situ, on the tell.
Many of the ostraca are fragmentary; on some only single letters are
visible. However, the importancee ven of these should not be underestimated.
Most of the ostraca derive from the later strata, yet every stratum beginning
with the first citadel is representedb y at least a few. Thus, again for the first
time, we have a paleographic series of Hebrew scribal hands from the late
10th century B.C. on, which may be of much help for the dating of other
documents.
Two examples may suffice. (1) In the last season our first and only well-
stratified ostracon of Stratum XI was found. It contains about ten well-pre-
served characters,s ome paleographicallyi mportant( for example, b, z, t, n, m, s,
q). This is by far the earliest Hebrew ostracon known, antedating the Sama-
ria Ostraca by about 150 years; it belongs to the earliest stages of Hebrew
cursive. Comparatively,i ts script stands between the Gezer Calendar and the
Moabite Stone. Taking into consideration, however, the primitive nature of
the Gezer Calendar, the Arad ostracon may be approximatelyc ontemporary.
As 10th century B.C. Hebrew cursive, our example is an isolated instance
and the lapidary inscriptions, as usual, show distinctly conservative trends.
(2) The exact date of the SamariaO stracai s still widely disputed. Examining
their script, we find in it a unique yodh with an additional cursive hook at
its tail. Scholars thought that this was peculiar to the Samaria Ostraca, but
it now appears also at Arad in inscriptions of Stratum X. It is, therefore,
obvious that this form was used for a certain period and that it is of chrono-
logical significance. The termination date for Stratum X at Arad cannot be
later than the beginning of the 8th century B.C. (or possibly the latter part
of the 9th century). The Samaria Ostraca, therefore, evidently belong to
about the same period.
Fortunately, a good part of the ostraca are important not only paleo-
graphically but also in their contents. Some are preserved remarkablyw ell;
some are complete and unique documents. To deal briefly with the Aramaic
ostraca, most were found in refuse pits, and are dockets of the Persian garri-
son. Their contents are quite monotonous. They contain mainly personal