Iron Age Levant

INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH: To-date, there has been a greater focus on Egypto-Asiatic relations in the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1550–1150 BC) than during much of the succeeding Iron Age to early Persian periods (ca. 1150–525 BC).  In regards to the Iron Age, the first few centuries of which have sometimes been labeled a “Dark Age,” most studies have relied more upon textual-pictorial evidence and have yet to explore the full potential offered by the extant archaeological record, especially regarding the quantification and analysis of diverse data.  Although this deficiency is related to less pertinent archaeological and textual evidence having survived from the Iron Age,  sufficient data remain to clarify diverse aspects of Egypt’s relations with the Levant.  The following paper addresses these issues, summarizing and augmenting the Iron Age portion of this writer’s Ph.D. dissertation (1998) and related research.

Ever since the seventeenth century, the 'Phoenicians' have had the role of transmitters of culture. For a long time they were just that, but recently, they have also been brought to the fore as initiators of and leading participants in Mediterranean trade, sometimes almost to the effect of a complete reversal of earlier Orientalistic and Hellenocentric points of view. One way or another, they are considered to have been an important factor in the history of the Mediterranean, which is reflected by the attention that they have received over time. To an outsider, this would suggest that it is quite well known who the 'Phoenicians' were; but in fact, the material record is extremely scanty, extant written records are minimal and even their name is not indigenous. This has of course been noted before, and there are a number of studies that deal with the question of how apposite the use of the term 'Phoenician' might be. This paper will do similarly, but it deviates from this group fundamentally in its conclusions: it will argue that 'Phoenicia' may be defined linguistically, but only vaguely so in archaeology, and not at all historically. Nor was there a 'Phoenician' ethnic identity. A better approach would be to treat the 'Phoenician' cities separately in historical studies. The argumentation for this view will be provided by going through each of the relevant fields separately and surveying the available evidence.

The theme of nudity in the votive clay figurines is closely correlated
with that of the meaning of the use of dress in the society that created them. In this paper, on the basis of the analysis of the votive coroplastic from the cult place of Kharayeb, dating from the 7th to the Hellenistic period, the phenomenon of the appearance in the Late Iron Age Levant repertoire of female figurines wearing a long, simple mantle or more sophisticated dress will be analyzed. In fact, even if naked female figurines presenting their breasts are still part of the local repertoire, it is
evident that, from the Late Iron Age onwards, the Levantine communities feel the need to represent women with clothes probably to emphasize the gender, age and social position. The introduction of the Greek repertoire will be also considered. In particular, it is interesting that the population of the Phoenician agrarian hinterland in the Hellenistic period “delegates” to images of a distant and very different world the  representation of their own physical appearance (body, dress, movement, etc.) The aim of this paper is to assess this act of delegation, which was performed not by an individual but by an entire community, considering that ritualization strategies are closely linked to the body (according to embodiment theories) and that wearing a special dress, hairstyle or jewellery, or emphasizing a certain part of the body, is a
way of indicating status and identity.

Several scarabs from Levantine and Cypriot sites display particular typological characteristics and an evaluation of their archaeological contexts, distribution pattern and designs point towards a Phoenician production of the 9th - 8th centuries BCE located in the kingdom of Tyre, possibly shared by a workshop in Cyprus.

This article argues that many interpretations of the so-called "United Monarchy" of Saul, David, and Solomon are built upon false assumptions and problematic hermeneutics, not to mention that they draw upon anachronistic terminology. This is significant because such issues impact how the history of the early Israelite monarchy is reconstructed, how archaeological materials are related to political organization, and how text and archaeology are integrated. What is needed is a framework for reading the text that is methodologically informed and which draws upon relevant theories. As such this article provides a brief overview of the use of the terms "United Monarchy" and "Davidic/Solomonic Empire" in modern scholarship before turning to recent attempts to theorize and model ancient monarchies, including the ways in which ancient kingdoms controlled territory and how leaders legitimized their power and expressed their authority in a manner that unified their constituencies. From there it re-evaluates the biblical portrayal of the monarchies of Saul, David, and Solomon, considering in particular the nature of early Israel's political and social unity and identity, before turning to the potential archaeological correlates of political power during the reigns of these kings.

This article is the first in a series of articles on the history of Jaffa and deals with the earliest phase of settlement in Jaffa up through the end of the Achaemenid period. It incorporates both historical and archaeological evidence in an effort to provide a long overdue examination of Jaffa’s role within the study of the history and archaeology of these early periods.

This study discusses the Iron Age IIA (tenth–ninth centuries BCE) cult place at Lachish in the Judahite Shephelah, Israel. The architecture and the artifacts of Sanctuary 49 and of the additional cultic remains in its vicinity are re-evaluated,
and the recently proposed revision of the excavator’s stratigraphic conclusions is critically assessed. The article delineates the rich cultural background and the region-specific features of the evolving Judahite cult and ritual practices as
revealed at Lachish.

VIDEO AVAILABLE at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOfiNn_mvnU

This lecture is in memory of Anis Chaaya, professor of Art and
Archaeology at the Lebanese University and member of the Heritage LG
at ARWA, who unexpectedly passed away from Covid-19 on March 21, 2021.
This presentation will focus on his researches at two Lebanese sites
that formed parts of his Master and PhD studies and in recognition of
his contributions to the field of archaeology in the ancient Near
East.
The scope of archaeological interest of Anis was vast and varied. For
his MA, he studied the Iron Age II pottery from Tell Arqa (ancient
Irqata) in northern Lebanon and successfully anchored the local and
imported ceramic productions to the three levels dated to the Iron Age
II, proving that the Iron Age reoccupation of the site after a long
hiatus did not occur until the 10th century BCE when a dense network
of houses was uncovered. The site gained some importance during the
9th-8th century and was fitted with a rampart and a temple probably
dedicated to Ashtart. But it was largely destroyed in the mid-eight
century BCE coinciding with the military campaign of Tighlat Pileser
III to Arqa. Afterwards, occupation ceased and the site was turned
into a cemetery with a number of cremation pits that was used until
the 7th century BCE.
For his PhD, Anis examined the extensive defensive fortification
system laid out by the Crusaders in the County of Tripoli. During his
last years, his researches on the medieval poliorcetic tradition were
particularly focused on the Crusader castles of Byblos where he
initiated in 2015 a program of excavations and GPR surveys on the
medieval remains of Byblos. His research confirmed concretely that the
Crusaders erected their castle on the imposing fortifications walls
from the Bronze and Iron Ages, using parts of the so-called Hyksos
rampart as foundation for the donjon. Excavations at the foot of the
castle revealed a stone glacis that could be dated to the Middle
Bronze Age I.

SUMMARY: Lecture-17 continues the discussion about the arrival of the Sea Peoples in the Levant, especially the Peleset (Philistines), who have definite observable traits from the Mycenaeans (including Mycenaean Crete), the  Philistine settlement in the southwest coastal plain in the Levant, their material culture (e.g., pottery [Bichrome ware]; artistic motifs; some elite, Aegean-style chamber tombs with benches; various Aegean-style temples; Mycenaean-derived figurines; seals similar to Cypro-Minoan script; etc.), and some remains from settlements at Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, Gezer, Tell Qasile, and elsewhere. This lecture is designed mainly as an educational resource/aid for college students (i.e., normally posted only on my institution's course website), the public (e.g., people auditing my course), and interested colleagues from other disciplines (to whom I periodically provide copies privately).  I am posting it here, both as a broader access, educational tool, and especially to promote the study of this region and its past societies.  For further knowledge about this region and period, I refer interested parties to the textbooks and other sources from which the initial materials were extracted for this ppt. (see syllabus; e.g., initially Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible), and/or the bibliographies in these works and my online resource guides (see other files in my academia folders).  Much of this and the other lectures summarize the pertinent materials in the course textbook(s), add in other data, including my own research materials, and furnish numerous images to clarify/illustrate the wealth of information encountered in the textbook(s).  Some generic imagery (usually indicated as such) is posted to aid in transmitting various concepts visually, and/or when a specific image remains not located (temporarily).  I update and revise such lectures each time, with such elective courses normally being taught once every two years.  I try to cover the most current, mainstream views, and usually place summary notes at the end of each lecture (or in separate test study guides).  Over time, each lecture is improved, errors rectified, and additional data placed within the lecture.  These ppt. lectures take many hours to compile, but they have proved useful to many of my more serious students (who have since pursued graduate degrees), and a few colleagues, who, like me, often teach outside our main fields of specialty, and I hope they can be of benefit to others as well.  My apologies for any errors I may have made (over time, as I teach this course every two years, I try to rectify any errors that might slip in inadvertently), and for my liberal usage of educational imagery from professional sources and vetted internet sources.  UPDATES: Adding in new images, text, updates, some text edits, and some new formatting (2023).

Hazor, a key Iron Age II site in the southern Levant, was excavated by Yigael Yadin in the 1950s and subsequently by Amnon Ben-Tor. The Iron Age II stratigraphic sequence established proved very influential and nearly canonical; it was interpreted as representing periodic building-and-destruction cycles. The three superimposed ‘cities’ thus reconstructed were inter-alia understood to reflect alternating Israelite/Aramean
domination in this conflict-prone border area before the final Assyrian destruction in the late 8th century BCE. Here we offer an alternative reconstruction for Hazor’s stratigraphic/architectural development, with repercussions for several chronological and political-historic aspects of the Kingdom of Israel and the greater Levant.

SUMMARY: Lecture-21 discusses the Iron IIB-C periods (925-586 BC), equated with the Divided Monarchies of Israel and Judah, including a discussion regarding archaeological finds in the Northern kingdom of Israel, at Omri and Ahab's royal capital at Samaria (e.g., the palace; the Samaria Ostraca; regional administration), settlement patterns and use of solid wall fortifications and water cisterns (e.g., Hazor; Megiddo); the beginning of a discussion on the Southern Kingdom of Judah, including Jerusalem, its expansion, fortifications, and growing affluence, a nearby military stronghold and subsequent royal retreat at Ramat Rahel, and featuring the Assyrian siege and capture of Lachish. This lecture is designed mainly as an educational resource/aid for college students (i.e., normally posted only on my institution's course website), the public (e.g., people auditing my course), and interested colleagues from other disciplines (to whom I periodically provide copies privately).  I am posting it here, both as a broader access, educational tool, and especially to promote the study of this region and its past societies.  For further knowledge about this region and period, I refer interested parties to the textbooks and other sources from which the initial materials were extracted for this ppt. (see syllabus; e.g., initially Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible), and/or the bibliographies in these works and my online resource guides (see other files in my academia folders).  Much of this and the other lectures summarize the pertinent materials in the course textbook(s), add in other data, including my own research materials, and furnish numerous images to clarify/illustrate the wealth of information encountered in the textbook(s).  Some generic imagery (usually indicated as such) is posted to aid in transmitting various concepts visually, and/or when a specific image remains not located (temporarily).  I update and revise such lectures each time, with such elective courses normally being taught once every two years.  I try to cover the most current, mainstream views, and usually place summary notes at the end of each lecture (or in separate test study guides).  Over time, each lecture is improved, errors rectified, and additional data placed within the lecture.  These ppt. lectures take many hours to compile, but they have proved useful to many of my more serious students (who have since pursued graduate degrees), and a few colleagues, who, like me, often teach outside our main fields of specialty, and I hope they can be of benefit to others as well.  My apologies for any errors I may have made (over time, as I teach this course every two years, I try to rectify any errors that might slip in inadvertently), and for my liberal usage of educational imagery from professional sources and vetted internet sources. UPDATED: New formatting, additional images and text, some new slides and text, revisions, etc. November 2023.

SUMMARY: Lecture-24 discusses the Iron IIB-C periods (925-586 BC), equated with the Divided Monarchies of Israel and Judah, including a discussion regarding Israelite material culture, the Dan shrine, Beersheba shrine (e.g., an altar of cut stone [non-orthodox]), the Arad shrine (with possible allusions to an Asherah? of Yahweh [via two focal points within the sanctuary]; an orthodox altar of uncut stone), the Edomite shrine at Horvat Qitmit, material culture (e.g., figurines; seals; ivories; Phoenician influences; pottery; metallurgy), trade relations, ostraca/writing, and burial customs. This lecture is designed mainly as an educational resource/aid for college students (i.e., normally posted only on my institution's course website), the public (e.g., people auditing my course), and interested colleagues from other disciplines (to whom I periodically provide copies privately).  I am posting it here, both as a broader access, educational tool, and especially to promote the study of this region and its past societies.  For further knowledge about this region and period, I refer interested parties to the textbooks and other sources from which the initial materials were extracted for this ppt. (see syllabus; e.g., initially Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible), and/or the bibliographies in these works and my online resource guides (see other files in my academia folders).  Much of this and the other lectures summarize the pertinent materials in the course textbook(s), add in other data, including my own research materials, and furnish numerous images to clarify/illustrate the wealth of information encountered in the textbook(s).  Some generic imagery (usually indicated as such) is posted to aid in transmitting various concepts visually, and/or when a specific image remains not located (temporarily).  I update and revise such lectures each time, with such elective courses normally being taught once every two years.  I try to cover the most current, mainstream views, and usually place summary notes at the end of each lecture (or in separate test study guides).  Over time, each lecture is improved, errors rectified, and additional data placed within the lecture.  These ppt. lectures take many hours to compile, but they have proved useful to many of my more serious students (who have since pursued graduate degrees), and a few colleagues, who, like me, often teach outside our main fields of specialty, and I hope they can be of benefit to others as well.  My apologies for any errors I may have made (over time, as I teach this course every two years, I try to rectify any errors that might slip in inadvertently), and for my liberal usage of educational imagery from professional sources and vetted internet sources.  UPDATES: Some new formatting, edits, new text and slides, etc. (Nov. 2023).

SUMMARY: Lecture-22 discusses the Iron IIB-C periods (925-586 BC), equated with the Divided Monarchies of Israel and Judah, including a discussion regarding settlement patterns and selected sites in the Negev (e.g., Arad fort and its ostraca; the fortified town at Beersheba; a fort at Horvat Uza; a fort at Kadesh-Barnea; a fortified hilltop shrine at Kuntellet 'Ajrud; a fortified port at Tell el-Kheleifeh), and various aspects of material culture (e.g., seal types and sequence (e.g., lamelech seal; scarab beetle type seals; later 12-petal rosette seals on pottery). This lecture is designed mainly as an educational resource/aid for college students (i.e., normally posted only on my institution's course website), the public (e.g., people auditing my course), and interested colleagues from other disciplines (to whom I periodically provide copies privately).  I am posting it here, both as a broader access, educational tool, and especially to promote the study of this region and its past societies.  For further knowledge about this region and period, I refer interested parties to the textbooks and other sources from which the initial materials were extracted for this ppt. (see syllabus; e.g., initially Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible), and/or the bibliographies in these works and my online resource guides (see other files in my academia folders).  Much of this and the other lectures summarize the pertinent materials in the course textbook(s), add in other data, including my own research materials, and furnish numerous images to clarify/illustrate the wealth of information encountered in the textbook(s).  Some generic imagery (usually indicated as such) is posted to aid in transmitting various concepts visually, and/or when a specific image remains not located (temporarily).  I update and revise such lectures each time, with such elective courses normally being taught once every two years.  I try to cover the most current, mainstream views, and usually place summary notes at the end of each lecture (or in separate test study guides).  Over time, each lecture is improved, errors rectified, and additional data placed within the lecture.  These ppt. lectures take many hours to compile, but they have proved useful to many of my more serious students (who have since pursued graduate degrees), and a few colleagues, who, like me, often teach outside our main fields of specialty, and I hope they can be of benefit to others as well.  My apologies for any errors I may have made (over time, as I teach this course every two years, I try to rectify any errors that might slip in inadvertently), and for my liberal usage of educational imagery from professional sources and vetted internet sources.  UPDATES: Some reformatting, editing, and new text and slides (Nov. 2023).

EXTENDED CALL FOR PAPERS - 19th OF MAY

The University of Bradford is proud to host the 20th Iron Age Student Research Symposium (IARSS). The symposium will be held between the 31st of May and the 2nd of June, with papers, posters and presentations, followed by a guided visit to the Hull Museum on the 3rd of June.
IARSS is a research student focused conference, providing an opportunity for students to share their work, network and collaborate with others. This event is open for contributions from postgraduate research students and new researchers, however, Master students are also welcome to submit and participate in the conference. Although IARSS is promoted as an Iron Age conference, contributions from colleagues studying or working within related periods, such as the Late Bronze Age and Roman Iron Age are also welcome. IARSS has traditionally focused on Iron Age Britain, however we welcome contributions from those colleagues examining the Iron Age elsewhere in the world, including, but not limited to, Ireland, the European continent and the Near East.

For colleagues interested in participating, please submit an abstract between c.250-300 words and 5 keywords related to your research. Presentations should be 15-20 minutes long and in English. Posters may be bilingual but they must be understandable to English speakers and an abstract in English must be provided.

Abstracts should be sent to:
iarss2017@gmail.com until the 19th of May.

This monograph presents the final excavation report of Tell Qudadi (Tell esh-Shuna) located on the northern bank of the Yarkon river estuary into the central Mediterranean coast of Israel. As excavations were conducted in 1937-38 and were published only in a very preliminary form, the current authors offer a new chronological scheme for the impressive Iron Age fortress which shows two architectural phases. Their chronological down-dating assigns the fortress to the period between the second half of the 8th and the first half of the 7th centuries BC when the area was under Neo-Assyrian rule. Accordingly, the site formed part of a series of fortresses that were built on behalf of the Neo-Assyrian regime (sometimes by local vassals) at the estuaries of the major Palestinian rivers into the Mediterranean, which aimed at serving imperial goals and imperialistic policies, among which were protecting trade routes and emporia, projecting imperial power by a 'new architectural landscape' and supervising Phoenician trading activities. Based on the presence of Greek imports , the study of the site's Iron Age pottery assemblages allows one to reassess a number of contested chronological issues in a wider Mediterranean setting.

Simple dog burials, dating primarily to the second half of the 1st millennium b.c.e. (Persian–Hellenistic periods [ca. 6th–1st centuries b.c.e.]), have been excavated at more than a dozen Levantine sites, ranging from a handful of burials to more than 1,000 at Ashkelon. This study systematizes previously discussed canine interments, distinguishing intentional whole burials from other phenomena (e.g., dogs found in refuse pits), and suggests a new interpretation in light of human mortuary practice in the Iron Age II–III-period (ca. 10th–4th centuries b.c.e.) Levant. The buried dogs seem to be individuals from unmanaged populations living within human settlements and not pets or working dogs. Frequent references to dogs in literary and epigraphic Northwest Semitic evidence (including Hebrew, Phoenician, and Punic personal names) indicate a complex, familiar relationship between dogs and humans in the Iron Age Levant, which included positive associations such as loyalty and obedience. At some point in the mid-1st millennium b.c.e., mortuary rites began to be performed by humans for their feral canine “neighbors” in a manner resembling contemporaneous low-energy–expenditure human burials. This behavioral change may represent a shift in the conception of social boundaries in the Achaemenid–Hellenistic-period Levant.

ABSTRACT: Study guide to various aspects of the Divided Monarchy of Ancient Israel and Judah, including (1) eight selected main aspects of history during the period of the Divided Monarchy (925 - 586 BCE), (2) selected characteristics of the Israelite settlements of Samaria, Jezreel, Dan, Hazor, and Megiddo (925-720 BCE), (3) selected characteristics of the Judean settlements of Jerusalem, Ramat Rahel, Lachish, and other Judean towns, (4) the settlement patterns in the Northern Negev in general, and specific characteristics of the settlements at Arad, Beer Sheba, Kadesh-Barnea (Ain el-Qudeirat), Kuntillet Ajrud, and Tell el-Kheleifeh ("Ezion-Geber"?), (5) diverse aspects of the material culture of Israel and Judah during 925-586 BCE, including seal motifs, fortification types, city gate designs, ashlar masonry, pillared buildings (stables versus storehouses), water supply systems, temples, burials, and the 4-room house, and (6) Egypto-Levantine relations during 925 - 586 BCE (e.g., trade, campaigns, alliances, migrants, refugees, etc.). REVISED: Nov., 2018.

SUMMARY: Lecture-20 discusses the Iron IIB-C periods (925-586 BC), equated with the Divided Monarchies of Israel and Judah, including a broad, historical overview from 925 to 586 BC, following the kings of Judah, kings of Israel, and some neighbouring polities (e.g., Egypt; Aram-Damascus; Assyria).  The lecture also touches upon the increasing Assyrian campaigns against the western Levant, such as the Battle of Qarqar in 853 BC, between Shalmaneser III and a coalition of 12 Levantine states, the later siege and Sargon II's ultimate defeat of Samaria and the northern kingdom of Israel (which became an Assyrian province), Sennacherib's 701 BC defeat of Hezekiah (especially at Lachish, but including Jerusalem's surrender), Assyria's decline in the Levant, Egypt's re-vitalized Levantine involvement (under Psamtik I and Necho II in early Dynasty 26/Saite period [late 7th century BC]), and Nebuchhadnezzar II's subsequent defeat of Assyria, the Babylonian takeover of the Assyrian Empire, and Assyrian campaigns against and destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC. This lecture is designed mainly as an educational resource/aid for college students (i.e., normally posted only on my institution's course website), the public (e.g., people auditing my course), and interested colleagues from other disciplines (to whom I periodically provide copies privately).  I am posting it here, both as a broader access, educational tool, and especially to promote the study of this region and its past societies.  For further knowledge about this region and period, I refer interested parties to the textbooks and other sources from which the initial materials were extracted for this ppt. (see syllabus; e.g., initially Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible), and/or the bibliographies in these works and my online resource guides (see other files in my academia folders).  Much of this and the other lectures summarize the pertinent materials in the course textbook(s), add in other data, including my own research materials, and furnish numerous images to clarify/illustrate the wealth of information encountered in the textbook(s).  Some generic imagery (usually indicated as such) is posted to aid in transmitting various concepts visually, and/or when a specific image remains not located (temporarily).  I update and revise such lectures each time, with such elective courses normally being taught once every two years.  I try to cover the most current, mainstream views, and usually place summary notes at the end of each lecture (or in separate test study guides).  Over time, each lecture is improved, errors rectified, and additional data placed within the lecture.  These ppt. lectures take many hours to compile, but they have proved useful to many of my more serious students (who have since pursued graduate degrees), and a few colleagues, who, like me, often teach outside our main fields of specialty, and I hope they can be of benefit to others as well.  My apologies for any errors I may have made (over time, as I teach this course every two years, I try to rectify any errors that might slip in inadvertently), and for my liberal usage of educational imagery from professional sources and vetted internet sources.  UPDATES: Nov., 2023, adding in some new images, text revisions, and formatting.

Various studies discussing the evidence of the Neo-Assyrian presence in the region of Transjordan have also dealt with the toponym KUR Gi-di-ra-a (Gidira). The place is attested in Nimrud Letter 14 (ND 2773), dating to the reign of Tiglath-Pileser III. The note deals with the location and identification of this toponym in Transjordan.
-- NB: Unfortunately, and for reasons beyond my knowledge, there are several editorial errors and omissions in the final print version of the present note published in N.A.B.U. 2018/2. This is the original and unabridged version.

Two articles recently published suggested that Khirbet Qeiyafa belongs in the very late Iron Age I. The combination of both articles lead to the conclusion that the Iron Age I, including Khirbet Qeiyafa, should end at the third quarter of the 10th century BCE. In the following response we claim that if we place the fortified city of Khirbet Qeiyafa in late Iron Age I, the entire meaning of the terms Iron Age I and Iron Age II would become meaningless and they should be dropped altogether. However, if we still wish to use the term Iron Age I, it can not be manipulated to include the beginning of the urbanization in Judah that characterized the Iron Age II.

This paper focuses on the archaeological evidence for the period of Assyrian domination in Cilicia and will approach historical questions only in passing. The period investigated here is the time between Tiglathpileser III and Ashurbanipal. The paper discusses the available evidence against the results of the recently concluded excavations at Kinet Höyük which are currently
being prepared for publication.

Conventional analytical solutions to the statistics of radiocarbon dating are hampered by distributional issues and assumptions of convenience. Fortunately, given rapid advances in computational machinery, numerical methods offer a simple and robust alternative. In this paper we use the radiocarbon age data presented by Finkelstein and Piasetzky  (Finkelstein, 2010) to demonstrate a numerical method of generating sampling distributions of calibrated radiocarbon dates that is likely to provide greater precision and utility to archeologists. (Revised March 17 2015)

The current study examines skeletons found in Bronze and Iron Age destruction contexts from the southern Levant, within the framework of behavioural archaeology and the archaeology of destruction. It addresses the rarity of skeletons in such contexts, and argues that it is due to two main reasons: 1) genuine siege warfare was rather rare, and most cities capitulated without a battle, and therefore suffered no casualties; 2) after any destruction cities were thoroughly 'cleaned', mostly for hygienic reasons. A review of the find contexts of skeletons shows that their presence in surviving destruction layers occurs either because the skeletons could not be found soon after death, or their recovery was too difficult at the time. They may also have remained in these layers because the sites were abandoned, and thus hygiene did not play a major role. Yet, in some cases, it seems that skeletons were left in destruction layers intentionally, as a sort of punishment. Finally, it is suggested that the presence of skeletons in destruction contexts with no accompanying weapons, should not be seen as evidence for an earthquake as the cause of the destruction.

In the past decades, the study of cultural contacts in the Mediterranean has tested an ever-increasing number of theoretical models to describe the exchange between people from different backgrounds, and, as one of the outcomes of the still ongoing discussion, the basic concept of culture, as a monadic entity has been questioned. A growing discomfort has been felt in dividing the people of the Mediterranean into distinct cultural entities, which then can come into contact with each other. As an alternative, in the panel "Economy and Cultural Contact in the Mediterranean Iron Age", an approach was chosen, that turns away from the discussion of theoretical models and instead tries to understand economy as a basic driving force of cultural exchange: Which commodities and objects were shifted from on place to another, and which were not? In our introductory contribution we will concentrate on the 8th century BC and develop two perspectives on the east and the west, both involving traders from the Aegean.

SUMMARY: Lecture-23 discusses the Iron IIB-C periods (925-586 BC), equated with the Divided Monarchies of Israel and Judah, including a discussion regarding Judean settlement patterns, a "typical" settlement plan, the application of solid wall fortifications (albeit with a continuation of some casemate walls [less labour-intensive, cheaper, but easier to breach]), and urban layout (e.g., palace and podium construction [at Lachish]; ashlar masonry; sculpted window frames; proto-aeolic capitals; 4-chambered gates). This lecture is designed mainly as an educational resource/aid for college students (i.e., normally posted only on my institution's course website), the public (e.g., people auditing my course), and interested colleagues from other disciplines (to whom I periodically provide copies privately).  I am posting it here, both as a broader access, educational tool, and especially to promote the study of this region and its past societies.  For further knowledge about this region and period, I refer interested parties to the textbooks and other sources from which the initial materials were extracted for this ppt. (see syllabus; e.g., initially Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible), and/or the bibliographies in these works and my online resource guides (see other files in my academia folders).  Much of this and the other lectures summarize the pertinent materials in the course textbook(s), add in other data, including my own research materials, and furnish numerous images to clarify/illustrate the wealth of information encountered in the textbook(s).  Some generic imagery (usually indicated as such) is posted to aid in transmitting various concepts visually, and/or when a specific image remains not located (temporarily).  I update and revise such lectures each time, with such elective courses normally being taught once every two years.  I try to cover the most current, mainstream views, and usually place summary notes at the end of each lecture (or in separate test study guides).  Over time, each lecture is improved, errors rectified, and additional data placed within the lecture.  These ppt. lectures take many hours to compile, but they have proved useful to many of my more serious students (who have since pursued graduate degrees), and a few colleagues, who, like me, often teach outside our main fields of specialty, and I hope they can be of benefit to others as well.  My apologies for any errors I may have made (over time, as I teach this course every two years, I try to rectify any errors that might slip in inadvertently), and for my liberal usage of educational imagery from professional sources and vetted internet sources.  UPDATES: Some revised formatting, editing, and new text and images (Nov. 2023).

Complex Communities explores how sedentary settlements developed and flourished in the Middle East during the Early Iron Age nearly four thousand years ago. Using archaeological evidence, Benjamin Porter reconstructs how residents maintained their communities despite environmental uncertainties. Living in a semi-arid area in the present-day country of Jordan, villagers faced a harsh and unpredictable ecosystem. Communities fostered resilience by creating flexible production routines and leadership strategies.  Settlements developed what archaeologists call “communal complexity,” a condition through which small-scale societies shift between egalitarian and hierarchical arrangements.  Complex Communities provides detailed, scientifically grounded reconstructions of how this communal complexity functioned in the region.

These settlements emerged during a period of recovery following the political and economic collapse of Bronze Age Mediterranean societies.  Scholars have characterized west-central Jordan’s political organization during this time as an incipient Moabite state. Complex Communities argues instead that the settlements were a collection of independent, self-organizing entities. Each community constructed substantial villages with fortifications, practiced both agriculture and pastoralism, and built and stocked storage facilities. From these efforts to produce and store resources, especially food, wealth was generated and wealthier households gained power over their neighbors. However, power was limited by the fact that residents could—and did—leave communities and establish new ones.

Complex Communities reveals that these settlements moved through adaptive cycles as they adjusted to a changing socio-natural system. These sustainability-seeking communities have lessons to offer not only archaeologists studying similar struggles in other locales, but also to contemporary communities facing negative climate change. Readers interested in resilience studies, Near Eastern archaeology, historical ecology, and the archaeology of communities will welcome this volume.