The Destruction of Megiddo at The End of PDF

THE DESTRUCTION OF MEGIDDO AT THE
END OF THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND

ITS HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE
David Ussishkin
Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University
Renewed excavations at Tel Megiddo - planned on a long-term, systematic

basis in order to study the stratigraphy of the site and its material culture - were
recently started by the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University under the
direction of I. Finkelstein and myself. In 1992, at the request ofthe National Parks
Authority, our expedition carried out a small excavation in the Late Bronze Age
city gate uncovered at the time by the Chicago Oriental Institute expedition. This
excavation prompted me to study afresh the data of Late Bronze Age Megiddo -
in particular that of Area AA - and to try to reappraise the final stage of the city of
that period. This study follows the previous detailed reappraisals of LB Megiddo,
published by K.M. Kenyon (1969), R. Gonen (1987) and A. Kempinski (1989). As
Megiddo is undoubtedly a key site for the entire country during this period, such a
reappraisal naturally leads me to discuss wider historical and archaeological
implications.
A. The Destruction of the Stratum VII Palace in Area AA
The Late Bronze Age palace was constructed in Stratum VIII, replacing a
palatial edifice of Strata X-IX situated here (Fig. 2). Its central part included a large
courtyard (N0.2041) and a large hall(?) with a shell-paved floor and a central water
installation (No. 3091). The palace wings to the east, north and west of Courtyard
2041 and Hall 3091 were radically modified and rebuilt in Stratum VIIB, but the
above courtyard and hall remained unchanged (Fig. 3). The southern wing of the
palace is located outside the excavated area, and nothing is known about it.
The palace was rebuilt again, according to Loud, in Stratum VIlA (Fig. 4). Its
western wing, which replaced the western wing of the former Stratum VIIB palace,
included the tripartite 'treasury' in which the famous cache of ivories was found
(Loud 1939).The 'treasury' was destroyed by a severe fire, and the ivories and other
objects were buried beneath the destruction debris.
An interesting suggestion was made by T. Dothan and I. Dunayevski (Dothan
1982:71 and Fig. 12). It seems quite possible that Unit 3186 inthe western wing of
Stratum VIIB (see Fig. 3) - together with the unnumbered units adjoining it on the
north and south - also formed a 'tripartite treasury' which was entered from Unit
3103 to its north. If that is so, the Stratum VIlA 'treasury' replaced an earlier,
240
Ussishkin: Megiddo at the End of the Late Bronze Age
Stratum VIIB 'treasury' when the western wing of the palace was rebuilt in Stratum
VIlA.
According to Loud, the central part of the Stratum VIIB palace (i.e. Courtyard
2041 and Hall 3091), as well as its northern wing, were destroyed in a violent
conflagration and were rebuilt in Stratum VIlA. In Loud's own words (Megiddo
II:29):
" The Stratum VIIB palace obviously suffered violent destruction so

extensive that the Stratum VIlA builders deemed it more expedient to level
off the resulting debris and build over it than to remove it all as was the
procedure in previous rebuilding undertakings. When excavated court 2041
and room 3091 of Strata VIII - VIIB were filled with fallen stone to a height of
about a meter and a half over which a new, Stratum VIlA pavement must
have stretched. The original presence of such a floor is attested by plaster on
the upper portion of the walls.... The base of the plaster ... [was discerned
and] an approximate pavement level... roughly 1.65 m. above the Strata
VIII-VIIB pavement, may therefore reasonably be accepted. Charred
horizontal lines found here and there on the walls of the rooms to the north of
the court... at about this same level, supply a general floor level....
Peculiar to this phase of the palace is the frequent use at floor level of mud
brick .... It is surfaced with mud plaster which in the case of court 2041 at least
was painted, as indicated both by quantities of painted fragments found on
top of the stone debris and by faint traces of a design still intact upon the wall
in the northwest corner."
The above findings are well illustrated in Fig. 5, reproduced here from Megiddo
II: Fig. 71. It shows the northwest corner of Court 2041. The man stands on the
Stratum VIII- VIIB floor, which was found covered by destruction debris. The
Stratum VIlA floor was not found in the excavation, but it is assumed to have
extended at the level of the man's head (Fig. 6:1). The part of the wall below this
elevation (i.e. the Stratum VIIB wall) differs from the upper part of the wall,
assigned to Stratum VIlA, which was thinner, constructed of bricks and plastered
with painted mud plaster.
In my opinion the above findings should be interpreted differently (Fig. 6:2-3). It
seems that all remains of the central part and northern wing of the palace assigned
by Loud to two superimposed buildings belong in fact to a single building which
was destroyed by fire. The lower walls, being thicker and stone-built, are walls of
the lower floor or basement - these being the walls and floors assigned by Loud to
the Stratum VIIB p.alace. The upper, brick-built and plastered walls - extending
exactly on top of and along the lower, thicker walls - are the walls of the main floor
of the same edifice. The walls of the main floor were decorated with painted mud
241
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
-=-
o 30m
Fig. I. A general plan of Tel Megiddo.

.J
plaster while naturally the walls ,of the· basement were not. The floors of the main
floor rested apparently on wooden beams which were burnt in the destruction as
indicated by the "charred horizontal lines found here and there on the walls of the
rooms to the north of the court". The palace met its end in a violent destruction
which must be assigned to the end of Stratum VIlA. The palace was massive and
high-rising - hence the debris of the ruined edifice was accumulated to a
considerable height. The floors of the rooms of the main floor - and all objects
which possibly lay on them - also collapsed when the building was destroyed, and
242
r--
<<
~
ll.l
•...
<
.s
--
:>
13
;:l
'iii
•...
.•..
[J)
'" C"i
.~
~
243
to
1'-
244
[fB
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
...J
<D
1'-
'CC
~
,..;
>
rn
.5
e
<i
.•..•..
::l
S
<
<~
--
£
•.....
<i
<t:
......
oj
<t:
.5
--
<t:
[~
;>
S
;:l
1;i
...
Vi
.,r
<D <D
""") ...J £
245
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
hence Loud did not find any floor at that level. Significantly, Loud does not assign
to Stratum VIlA any finds in that part of the palace, apparently because all the
finds were uncovered on the lower floor or in the debris covering it.
Regarding the eastern wing of the Stratum VIlA palace, Loud adds that "no
traces of the east portion of the palace remained. In general it probably was similar
to the corresponding part in Stratum VIIB, since marked similarity prevails

elsewhere throughout the building" (Megiddo II:3l). On the basis of the above
interpretation we assume that the eastern wing contained only a single floor, which
-like most of the palace - was built in Stratum VIIB and continued unchanged in
Stratum VIlA.
The history of the palace can be summarized as follows (Figs. 2-4). The edifice
was built in Stratum VIII and parts of it were modified or rebuilt twice - in
Stratum VIIB and in Stratum VIlA. The central part of the palace included a large
courtyard - Court 2041 and the adjoining Ha1l3091. In Stratum VIIB the eastern,
northern and western wings were rebuilt and their ground-plan changed, while the
central part of the building remained as it was. Parts of the building now contained
two floors. In Stratum VIlA the western wing was partly modified and an annex-
the 'treasury' - was added. It may have replaced a similar unit in the modified part
of the western wing. At the end of Stratum VIlA the edifice met its end in a violent
fire. Loud reported remains ofthe severe destruction in the 'treasury', Court 2041
and the northern wing, but we can assume that the entire building was razed to the
ground.
From the stratigraphic point of view it seems clear that in Area AA the transition
from Stratum VIIB to Stratum VIlA was peaceful, and continuity is indicated. In
fact, the same palace existed in both strata. The overall destruction of the Stratum
VIlA palace was violent, indicating the end of a chapter in the political history of
Megiddo. The destruction of the Stratum VIlA palace is clearly a cardinal
stratigraphic and chronological pivot, forming a firm basis for our discussion
below.
B. The Excavation in the Late Bronze Age Gatehouse in Area AA
A large, well-preserved gatehouse was uncovered by the Chicago Oriental

Institute in Area AA (Megiddo 11:16-33). The gatehouse dates to the Late Bronze
Age, but Loud raised the possibility that it was erected already in Stratum X. As
shown by remains of Stratum VIB located to the south of the gatehouse, it could
not have been in use after Stratum VIlA.
Two phases were observed by Loud in the gate passage. The earlier one, ascribed
to Stratum VIII or earlier (Fig. 2), included a stone-paved approach roadway
ascending along the slope of the mound, terminating in a piazza in front of the
246
Fig. 5. The northwest corner of Court 2041 of the palace, from southeast.
gatehouse. The gate passage was stone-paved, while the street beyond the inner
entrance of the gate was lime-paved. From the piazza, the way to the city continued
to ascend along the gate passage and the street. In the later phase, the outer entrance
of the gate was blocked by a stone wall ca. 1.50 m. high (Figs. 3, 7). The blocking
wall served as a retaining wall for a fill laid in the gate passage, on which extended
the floor of the later phase, ascribed to Stratum VIIB (see section in Megiddo II:
Fig. 64). This floor was lime-paved (Fig. 8); it extended horizontally from the top of
the blocking wall, merging with the ascending floor of the earlier phase in the street
ca. 1-2 m. beyond the inner fa<;:adeof the gatehouse. Near the blocking wall, the
floor of the later phase was ca. 1.50m. above the ascending roadway assigned to the
earlier phase. Significantly, no remains of an ascending roadway outside the
gatehouse corresponding to the raised gate passage of the later phase were detected.
In Loud's words: "An outer approach to the gate at this higher level was not
detected, but its original existence must be assumed" (Megiddo II:25).
Following the excavation of the gatehouse, the Chicago expedition blocked its
central part to enable the construction above, the gatehouse of a railroad for
transferring excavated soil to the dumping area (see Megiddo II: Fig. 43). In 1992
the National Parks Authority decided to remove the blocking and reopen the gate
passage, so that visitors to Megiddo could approach the site through the impressive
gatehouse, one of the best preserved Canaanite gates in Palestine. This project was
247
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
....••. " .•........•........

Pointed Plaster //////////
,-.......'.:: -....... -......'..:. //////////
....... ,
,-......."'-
,' , ..••.•. -......""'"
..•.......••..•. ' //////////
//////////
................................................................................ "'-
........ ~ //////////
VilA Debris '::. //////////

............................. ' . //////////

........................................................................... "- / ' . /
.........................
......................... .
..••..
/Burnt De,bri~ /
.......................... . /of Entire/ / / /
"'-7'TF777-T77-:- /Building' / / / Y
/////////, / / / / / / / / / /
//////////, //////////
/////////, //////////
/'/////////, / / / / / / / / / /
/ /VIIB Burnt' / , //////////
/ Debris / / / / , //////////
/////////, //////////
/////////, //////////
/////////, / / / / / / / / / /
//////////, //////////
/////////, / ' , , " I' / " "/
/' VIIBFloor, / / , / !-q~er ,FJ0'or'/

1 3
Pointed Plaster
Floor
Lower Floor
2
Fig. 6. A schematic section illustrating the different interpretations of the stratigraphic da~a in
the central part of the Stratum VII palace: (1) Loud's view; (2) My view - original
situation; (3) my view - excavated situation.
initiated and directed by S. Ben-David, the manager of the national parks in

northern Israel. Soon after the clearing of the gate passage had been started it
became clear that Loud had not completed the excavation of the inner parts of the
gate passage before reblocking it. Therefore, our expedition was asked to complete
the excavation. This work was carried out in 1992,with the aid of Shlomoh Mendel,
248
who supervised the work, and Orna Zimhoni who also undertook the study of the
finds. Following the excavation, the National Parks Authority partly restored the
walls of the gatehouse and the paved gate passage under the supervision of G.
Tuviah (Fig. 13), and the main entry to the site has now been changed as planned,
passing through the restored gatehouse.
In our small-scale excavation (labelled Area G) we completed the excavation of

the two inner chambers of the gate and the part of the gate passage between them
(Fig. 9). We cleared afresh the debris accumulated since the American dig in the
outer parts of the gate, and made soundings in the floor of both outer chambers in
order to study the foundations of the gatehouse and their stratigraphic relationship
with the pavement of the gate passage. Finally, we made a sounding in the street to
the inside of the gate and beside the fal;ade of its right tower, in order to try and
establish the relationship between the drain extending in the street and the
gatehouse. Our main observations are briefly described below.
As stated by Loud, the structure of the gatehouse does not have deeply-set
foundations. The lowest course seen above the stone pavement in fact forms the
foundation of the structure. As it seems, the stone pavement in the gate passage -
and hence the approaching roadway - were built concurrently with the walls of the
gate. At some points the stones of the pavement extend beneath the stones of the
lower course of the walls but at other points they lean against them. Inside the
gatehouse the stone pavement extended along the gate passage but only in parts of
the gate chambers. In the front, left chamber a pavement was not laid, and the
gatehouse walls rest directly upon older wall stumps which are differently oriented.
At the inner end of the gate passage a transverse groove was found in the pavement
(Fig. 10); it obviously marks the position of a wooden beam placed here as a
threshold. Similar grooves were noted in the threshold of the inner entrance in the
Level III inner gatehouse at Lachish (Lachish III: PI. 15:2; Ussishkin 1978:60;
Fig. 15).
We excavated two ovens (tabuns) built on the unpaved floor of the left, inner gate
chamber (Fig. 11). A third oven apparently constructed on the floor of the right,
inner chamber was removed by the workers of the National Parks Authority before
the beginning of the excavation. Significantly, all three ovens were based on the
original floor of the gate passage, that is the pavement of Loud's earlier phase. The
debris in the area of the ovens, accumulated to a considerable height, included
many ashes and pieces of burnt wood. Six wood samples were identified by Dr. Nili
Liphschitz as olive wood (Olea europaea). No remains of the higher floor of the
later phase whose existence had been reported by Loud were encountered.
Some pottery, mostly vessel fragments used to support the walls of the ovens, was
found here. Comparison with the pottery published by Loud is not easy, as only
complete vessels are shown in Megiddo II rather than the entire assemblage. Orna
249
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
Fig. 7. The 'blocking wall' across the gatehouse, from north. In foreground - the pavement of
the first phase.
Fig. 8. The so-called pavement of the second phase of the gatehouse as found, from north.
250
Published by Maney Publishing (c) Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University Ussishkin: Megiddo at the End of the Late Bronze Age
Fig. 9. The recleared gatehouse in 1993, from north.
Fig. 10. The inner edge of the stone pavement of the gate passage, demarcated by space filled with
a wooden beam, from east.
251
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
Zimhoni, who studied the pottery and will publish it in the excavation report,
concluded that it well fits the assemblage of Stratum VII, in particular Stratum
VIlA, but not that of Stratum VIII.
The above findings lead to the conclusion that only a single floor existed in the
gate passage, that is the stone pavement of Loud's earlier phase. The ovens built on
this floor were used - according to the pottery evidence - during the latest period
in the gate's history, i.e. Stratum VIlA, and hence the conclusion that the original
floor of the gate was in use till its last days.
It seems reasonable to conclude, as first suggested by Zimhoni, that the gatehouse
ceased to function as a gate during its last period of use. It was turned into a kind of
kitchen; the outer entrance was blocked by a stone wall, and ovens were constructed
and used in the inner chambers. The refuse from the ovens was allowed to
accumulate around them and in the gate passage. The gatehouse is not connected
stratigraphically to the nearby palace and hence it is not clear whether this radical
change in function took place before or after the final destruction of the palace.
There are three possible explanations for this change: First, the gatehouse went into
disuse as entry to the city on the northern side was shifted elsewhere; second, the
gate was blocked shortly before the destruction as part of the steps taken in the city
to meet the impending enemy attack; third, the gate was reused for domestic
purposes immediately following the destruction of the Stratum VIlA city.
Fig. II. Two ovens in the inner, left gate chamber, from west.
252
Two additional arguments can be presented in support of our conclusion that the
gatehouse contained only one floor. First, as mentioned above, no remains of an
ascending approach roadway associated with the assumed later floor were found.
At the entrance to the gatehouse the level of the assumed upper floor was ca. 1.50m.
higher than that of the lower stone-pavement and the approaching roadway,
therefore the latter could not have been used in association with the assumed upper
floor. Second, as can be observed in the photographs of the floor of the later phase
(Figs. 7-8; see also section through floor to the right of standing man in Megiddo
II: Fig. 43) it is made of a thin, inconsistent layer of lime which often occurs in
debris of fallen buildings. This 'lime floor' is markedly different from the underlying
stone pavement.
The 1992 excavation and restoration work which followed hardly added new
details not observed by Loud. Stones which appear to have been taken from earlier
structures were incorporated in the walls of the gatehouse. Notable among them are
the basalt and limestone slabs incorporated in the fa<;adeof the gate's towers. A gap
ca. 10-15 em. high appears in the walls of the gatehouse above the third or fourth
course (see Megiddo II: Fig. 45), where wooden beams once extended. Loud adds
that "carbonized wood was found both within thisjoint and throughout the gate at
its level" (ibid.:22). A large piece of a carbonized wooden beam was found in this
gap during the restoration of the gate. This, and two other pieces of carbonized
wood found by us near the walls and apparently dissociated from the debris of the
ovens, were identified by N. Liphschitz as olive wood. Could these carbonized
wood remains found in both excavations indicate that the gatehouse was destroyed
by fire?!
The right, western wing of the gatehouse was thickened on its exterior side -
along the fa<;adeto the right of the inner entrance and along its western side - by a
stone wall, termed the 'added wall' by Loud (Figs. 3-4). That part of the 'added
wall' which extended along the fa<;adewas examined afresh by us. This wall was
apparently added in a later stage of the gatehouse in order to strengthen it. It was
founded ca. 20 cm. higher than the adjoining wall of the gate proper (Megiddo II:
Fig. 65), and Loud believed that it was contemporary with the assumed upper,
second floor of the gate passage. As it seems, the 'added wall' was founded on debris
accumulated on the street surface beside the fa<;adeof the gatehouse.
In our sounding beside the right, inner fa<;adeof the gatehouse we reached the
remains of the drain descending along the street towards the edge of the site (Fig.
12).The drain extended beneath the floor of the street and was hidden by it. One of
the covering slabs of the drain was found in position. Loud observed that "the main
channel disappears toward the north between the palace and the gate" (Megiddo
II:22), and this seems to be the case. The continuation of the drain must have passed
between the original gatehouse and the eastern wall of the palace (Fig. 2), but the
253
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
Fig. 12. Soundings beside the inner fac;:adeof the gatehouse, from south. Note stone slab of drain
behind scale stick.
above-discussed 'added wall' which thickened the wall of the gatehouse extended
above the drain. The stratigraphic relationship between the drain (as well as the
street) and the gatehouse cannot be established. It seems to us that the gate house
was added to an already existing street, its builders leaving a narrow passage at the
lower part of the street between the eastern wall of the palace and the newly built
gatehouse.
c. The 'Tower Temple' in Area BB
The central cultic area of Megiddo was uncovered in Area BB in the eastern part
of the mound (Fig. 1). Here sanctuaries were erected and used continuously since
early periods. Three superimposed temples based on a similar plan were assigned by
Loud to Strata VIII-VIlA (see Megiddo II: 102-109). The Stratum VIIB temple
was a magnificent structure whose walls were based on ashlar stones (like the
above-discussed gatehouse). This edifice was later replaced by a poorer sanctuary
assigned by Loud to Stratum VIlA (Fig. 14). Significantly, this was the latest shrine
built in the cuItic area, and only buildings of secular function were uncovered here
in later strata.
The stratigraphic data presented in Megiddo II are meagre. We can assume that
254
Fig. 13. The gatehouse, as partly restored by the National Parks Authority.
the Stratum VIIB temple was razed to the ground. Howev~r, this assumed
destruction is referred to only indirectly by Loud: a column base situated in the
entrance of the shrine was "misplaced in the destruction of the temple" and "a
partially burned lime floor" extended at the back part of the cella. The walls of the
later Stratum VIlA shrine differ strikingly from those of the Stratum VIIB temple
(Fig. 14): they are much narrower and built of rubble, while those of the Stratum
VIIB temple are massive and based on a few courses of ashlars. While the
superstructure of the Stratum VIIB temple could have risen to a considerable
height - fitting the term 'tower temple' given to this type of temple - this was not
the case of the superimposed Stratum VIlA sanctuary which appears to have been a
low, poorly constructed building. Loud concluded that the Stratum VIlA temple
used the floor of the Stratum VIIB temple, but it seems possible that its floor - not
observed by Loud - extended ca. 50 cm. or even more above it.l
One datum - which can be observed in the schematic section of the temples in Megiddo II:
Fig. 247 - seems to support such a conclusion. The bottom of the staircase leading to the
platform of the latest temple (Fig. 14) is laid ca. 50 cm. higher than the floor of the Stratum
VIIB temple. This indicates that the floor associated with the staircase lay higher than the
former floor, not - as believed by Loud - that the two lowest stone steps ofthe staircase are
missing.
255
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
A. Mazar - who studied the pottery of Stratum VIlA - concluded" that the
Stratum VIlA temple was still in use in Stratum VIA (Mazar 1985:97, n. 6). His
conclusion was based on several pottery vessels found in the shrine which are later
in date than Stratum VII. If Mazaris right, it would follow, in my opinion, that this
temple was in fact constructed only after the destruction of Stratum VIlA. In that
case, a well-built 'tower temple' stood here in Stratum VIIB-A, and was destroyed
at the end of Stratum VIlA. Following the destruction a much poorer structure
based on a similar ground plan was builtin its place by the remaining population.
Three fragmentary Egyptian statuettes carved of black stone - among them the
broken statue of Thuthotep, a high official of the 12th Dynasty - were found
embedded in the platform wall of the 'tower temple' (Megiddo II: PIs. 265-266; see
also Williams and Logan 1989). Unfortunately, Loud does not state whether it was
the platform wall of the Stratum VIIB temple or that of Stratum VIlA. On the basis
of the above theory that the Stratum VIIB temple was in fact destroyed at the end of
Stratum VIlA, I would like to raise the possibility that these statuettes were kept in
this temple, and were smashed when the temple was destroyed at the end of Stratum
VIlA. Their remains were then collected and buried in the platform of the restored
temple, which - according to the above theory - possibly post-dates Stratum
VIlA. The burial of the statuettes was probably a cultic burial, to be compared to
other cases of ritual burial of desecrated monuments (see Ussishkin 1970).
The presence of 12th Dynasty statuettes in the context of a Late Bronze Age
temple calls for an explanation. Weinstein (1974:54-57) believes that the statuettes
were imported to Megiddo later than the Middle Kingdom period as part of trade
or cultural interest in Egyptian objects. It seems to me, however, that - as
suggested by Kempinski (1989:55) - the statuettes were kept in the successive
temples situated here since the Middle Kingdom period. Other cases of a venerated
statue being kept in a sanctuary for many generations can be cited, e.g. the statue of
Idrimi, king of Alalakh in the 15th century B.C.E., which was found in the Level IB
temple dated to the 13th century B.C.E. (Woolley 1955:89,240), and the statues of a
son of Ishpuini and of Argishti I, kings of Urartu in ca. 830-810 and 786-764
B.C.E. respectively, which - according to the Assyrian records (Luckenbill 1927:98)
-were kept in the temple of Musasir when it was looted by Sargon Il in 714 B.C.E.
An interesting installation adjoined the fa<;ade of the left tower of the latest
temple (Loud's Stratum VIlA temple). It comprised two large stone slabs and a
circular hole between them (Fig. 15;Megiddo II: 105;Figs. 247, 260). Assuming that
the installation is associated with the shrine, it seems possible that a monolithic stele
was secured in the hole, the flat slabs serving as an offering table. The published
photograph possibly also shows cup-marks carved in one of the slabs. Such stelae
secured in stone bases stood in front of the 'tower temple' at Tel Shechem (see
Wright 1965:84-87; Figs. 36-38, 49).
256
U ssishkin: Megiddo at the End of the Late Bronze Age
Fig. 14. The temple assigned to Stratum VIlA built on the ruins of the Stratum VIIB 'tower
temple'.
Fig. 15. Base for a cui tic stele(?) in front of the left tower of the Stratum VIlA temple, from
northwest.
257
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
D. The End of the Late Bronze Age City
We shall now turn to review and summarize the evidence pertaining to the final
phase of the Late Bronze Age metropolis and its tragic end.
A lower terrace demarcated by a steep slope extends to the northeast of the
mound (Fig. 1). The Chicago expedition built its expedition house on the terrace
but did not excavate there. Y. Yadin made a limited sounding on the northern
slope, without obtaining any specific results (Yadin, Shiloh and Eitan
1972:161-162). In 1994 we opened an excavation field (Area F) on the northern
slope of the terrace and the adjoining area of the summit, to be continued in later
seasons (Fig. 1).The excavation was supervised by D. llano The initial results of the
dig are very important for our discussion. A massive stone city wall was uncovered
on the slope. Although still undated, we can presently guess that it was erected in
the Middle Bronze Age, marking the first urban settlement period of the lower
terrace. The remains of a large structure, representing the latest organized settlement
on the summit (not counting some later Iron Age and Byzantine period remains)
date - in general terms - to the Late Bronze Age. We can assume that the
settlement on the lower terrace, which started in the Middle Bronze Age, continued
till the end the LB city. During these periods, the surface area of Megiddo covered
ca. 120 dunams. When Megiddo was later rebuilt in Stratum VI the settlement
diminished in size, and the lower terrace remained practically uninhabited.
The ruler's palace - the most magnificent edifice known from contemporary
Canaan - and the neighbouring gatehouse were uncovered in Area AA. As
discussed above, the palace was destroyed by a violent fire. The nearby gatehouse
was turned into a kitchen, and possibly also destroyed. Neither of these structures
was restored in Stratum VI.
A second palatial building, assigned to Strata VIII-VII, was uncovered in Area
DD by the Chicago expedition (Fig. 1; Megiddo II: 113-114; Figs. 411-412). We
can assume that this building as well was destroyed at the end of the period as new,
unrelated, structures extend above its ruins in Stratum VI.
In Area BB the magnificent 'tower temple' stood in Stratum VIlB. According to
Loud it was replaced by a poorer shrine in Stratum VIlA, after which all cultic
activity in this area came to an end. According to the alternative interpretation
presented above the Stratum VIlB temple was destroyed at the end of Stratum
VIlA, the superimposed, much poorer shrine having been built at a later date after
the destruction of the Stratum VII city. According to both interpretations a marked
change befell this area at the end of Stratum VIlA.
In Area CC, densely-situated domestic structures of Strata VIlB- VIlA were
uncovered (ibid.: 113;Fig. 409). Hardly any details are reported about them, and no
conclusions can be drawn.
258
Ussishkin: Megiddo at the End of the 'Late Bronze Age
Following the stratigraphic discussion we have to touch upon the question of the
fortifications. No city walls or other defence lines constructed during the Late
Bronze Age were found in the excavations, and it is not known to what fortification
system the above-discussed gatehouse was related. As it seems, two alternative
solutions can be offered: First, that the city was protected by a 'belt' of adjoining
houses situated along the upper periphery of the site, where the slope and upper
edge of the site had been shaped by the Middle Bronze Age glacis and walls.
Second, that LB Megiddo was not protected by city walls, as argued by Gonen
(1987:97-98). We may add that the absence of city walls or otherdefence lines built
in the Late Bronze Age also characterizes other important contemporary cities, e.g.
Razor, Lachish and Gezer (in the case of Gezer we assume that the 'Outer Wall' was
constructed in the Iron Age).
The wealth of the Stratum VII city can be seen in the large and versatile ivory
collection uncovered in the 'treasury' of the palace. As discussed by Liebowitz
(1987) this collection indicates the prosperity of Canaan, its material culture and art
in the later part of the Late Bronze Age.
At this point the question of Philistine pottery should be mentioned. The
stratigraphic context of the Philistine pottery uncovered by Loud is a controversial
issue. While monochrome Philistine pottery (known also as 'locally made
Mycenaean I1IC: 1b pottery') is completely absent, bichrome Philistine pottery was
found. According to the analysis of T. Dothan (1982:70-80) this type of pottery
appears already in Stratum VIlA. According to the analysis of A. Mazar
(1985:95-97) bichrome Philistine pottery appears at Megiddo only after Stratum
VIlA, and belongs to Stratum VI. I agree with the latter view.
Two inscribed objects indicate the date of this stratum. The first is an ivory pen
case bearing a cartouche of Rameses III which was found sealed by the destruction
debris of the Stratum VIlA palace 'treasury' (Loud 1939: No. 377). The second
inscribed object is a bronze base of a statue of Rameses VI, found buried beneath a
Stratum VIIB wall in Area CC (l.R. Breasted in Megiddo [[:135-138). From the
archaeological point of view there is no reason to question the importance of this
base, despite its relatively small size. Although not found in a reliable stratigraphic
context this base is usually assigned to Stratum VIlA (e.g. Albright 1936:28; Mazar
1985:97). It seems difficult to assign it to a later stratum; in Mazar's words: "It is
hard to believe that such an object would have reached Megiddo during the
subsequent poor phase of Stratum VIB". On the basis of the above-raised theory
that the Stratum VIIB temple was in fact destroyed at the end of Stratum VIlA we
can consider the possibility that the statue was placed in this temple and desecrated
at the time of its destruction. It seems probable - as suggested by Singer
(1988-1989: 107) - that the base was then intentionally buried. The burial of the
base recalls the possibly contemporary burial of broken Egyptian statuettes which
259
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
was discussed above. The statue itself - if it survived the destruction - was
probably also buried somewhere in the ruined city in a similar manner. The base
serves as a terminus ante quem for the destruction of Stratum VIlA. Rameses VI
reigned between 1141-1133 B.C.E. according to the low chronology of Wente and
Van Siclen (1976), and hence the date of ca. 1130 B.C.E. or later for the destruction
of the Stratum VIlA city.

The Late Bronze Age city state was a vassal to the Pharaoh of Egypt since the
campaign of Thutmose III. The nature of the Egyptian presence in Canaan and its
impact during the 20th Dynasty period is a difficult issue which is beyond the scope
of this paper (see Singer 1988; Weinstein 1992; Bietak 1993). Assuming that
Egyptian administration functioned here, with Beth-shan being its most northerly
stronghold, the Megiddo Stratum VII city certainly served as an important pivot in
this governmental system, or even - as suggested by Singer (1988-1989) - as the
centre of the Egyptian administration. Kitchen (1984:124)and Weinstein (1992:147)
expressed their reservations regarding the reliability of the Rameses VI statue base
as a chronological and historical datum. On the other hand Singer - following
Breasted - associated the statue with the Egyptian administration, thus concluding
that it came to an end (at least in the areas to the south of Megiddo) ca. 1130B. C.B.
Summing Up, Canaanite Megiddo was established as a great urban centre and
royal city-state at the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age, experiencing in its
history both prosperous as well as difficult periods. It became a great Levantine,
Canaanite centre of trade, cult, material culture, and art. Through most of this
period Megiddo maintained strong connections with Egypt. The first part of the
12th century B. C.B. saw this city-state - apparently a vassal state of the Pharaohs
of the 20th Dynasty - enjoying great prosperity. At ca. 1130 B.C.E. a catastrophe
occurred, concurrently with the collapse of the Egyptian administration of the
country. The last Canaanite city-level associated with the Egyptian rule - Stratum
VIlA - was violently destroyed. The complete destruction of the palace shows that
the ruling house - as well as the political structure it represented - collapsed as
well.
Following the catastrophe which befell the Stratum VIlA city, a very poor
settlement existed here in Stratum VIB. A larger settlement was later built in
Stratum VIA, but the new town never reached the importance of the previous one:
the settlement was smaller in size, the sole public building uncovered in the
excavations cannot be compared to the previous palaces, and the 'tower temple' -
which seems to have been restored - was but a shadow of the former one.
Lack of written sources leaves the questions of who was responsible for the
destruction of Stratum VIlA and the construction of Strata VIB and VIA in the
sphere of historical reconstruction. A detailed discussion of this subject is beyond
the scope of this study- I shall only mention in brief that the destruction of Stratum
260
VIlA may have been associated with the collapse of the Egyptian administration, or
may have occurred later and been prompted by it. The city may have been
successfully attacked by invading Sea People groups, by Levantine Canaanite
elements, by the Israelites, or by a force combined from different groups. With
regard to Strata VIB and VIA it seems that these settlements were established
predominantly by the population which survived the destruction of the Stratum

VIlA city (see Engberg 1940; Esse 1992:101-103).
E. Historical and Archaeological Implications
The special importance of Megiddo in the historical and archaeological study of

the 12th century B.C.E. is largely due to its strategic position dominating the Via
Maris - the main highway from Egypt to Syria. As is well known, the highway
extended northwards from Egypt through northern Sinai and then along the
coastal plain of Palestine. When reaching the barrier of the Mount Carmel Ridge,
the highway was diverted inland through the gorge of Nahal clron (Wadi Ara) to
C
the Valley of Jezreel. Here it split into a number of branches leading to the
northwest, northeast and east. At this point the passage along the highway was
effectively guarded by Megiddo. Whoever dominated Megiddo and kept forces
there had, in fact, control of the highway. The strategic location of Megiddo and the
importance of the highway for the control of Canaan are illustrated by the battle
between Thutmose III and the Canaanite kings in ca. 1475 B.C.E. It is clear that
from that time till ca. 1130 B.C.E. - the suggested date for the collapse of the
Egyptian administration in southern Canaan - Egyptian-dominated Megiddo
protected the highway which was crucial for the Egyptian administration, being
also the main road to the Egyptian stronghold at Beth-shan.
There were apparently side roads crossing the Mount Carmel Ridge, one to the
east of Nahal clron, which opened onto the Valley of Jezreel near Tel Taanach, and
another one to the west of Nahal clron, which opened onto the Valley of Jezreel
near Tel Jokneam. These alternative, less convenient roads are mentioned in the
story of Thutmose's III campaign. Both Taanach and Jokneam were settled in the
13th and 12th centuries B.C.E., and were probably dominated by the city-state of
Megiddo.
There are clear indications for the continuing strategic importance of Megiddo
and the highway during the Iron Age. Pharaoh Shoshenq I campaigned in Israel
and Judah ca. 925 B.C.E. At Megiddo Shoshenq I erected a royal stele - an
indication of conquest and domination. The erection of the stele seems to imply
that he controlled the city, possibly intending to hold it as well as the nearby
highway in the future (Ussishkin 1990:71-74). In 734-732 B.C.E. Tiglath-pileser
III conquered northern Israel and annexed it to Assyria, turning Megiddo into the
261
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
capital of the province. Pharaoh Necho sojourned at Megiddo in 609 B.c.E. on his
way to Carchemish, and here he encountered Josiah, king of Judah. With the
absence of detailed written evidence one can assume that this route was used by the
Assyrian kings in their campaigns to the south, or even by later rulers, such as
Cambyses who led the Persian army to Egypt in ca. 525 B.C.E. and Alexander the
Great who invaded Palestine after the conquest of Tyre in 332 B.C.E.
An alternative route for crossing Mount Carmel extended along the sea coast,
passing between the northwest edge of this mountainous barrier and the sea. As it
seems, in the periods under discussion passage along this route was possible, but
physically difficult and inconvenient. The Qishon Brook reached the sea at this
point, and passage along the coast necessitated crossing the brook. As concluded
from investigations at Tell Abu Hawam (see Avnimelech 1959),the sea coast at that
time reached this settlement and its port, located on the estuary of the Qishon
Brook. Hence the narrow plain extending between the coast and the lower slopes of
Mount Carmel was narrower than today -Part of the coastal plain here - mainly in
the area north of Nahal Taninim - was covered with marshes. Marshes apparently
also extended in the northern part of the Haifa Bay, in the area from the Qishon
Brook to the south of Acre.
While weighty evidence, both direct and indirect, indicates the use of the highway
through Nahal 'Iron in the Late Bronze and Iron Ages, no data point positively to
the use of the coastal road around Mount Carmel during these periods. As it seems,
it was hardly in use as part of the Via Maris at that time. It is logical to assume that
preference for the coastal road grew from the Persian period onwards, when
prosperous Phoenician settlements extended along the coastal plain. This
conclusion is supported by the inscription of Eshmun'ezer king of Sidon in the late
6th century B.C.E., which informs us that he ruled the area of the coastal plain to
the south of Mount Carmel, and by the description of the coastal settlements in the
Pseudo-Skylax list (see Galling 1938).
It is interesting to add here a few notes regarding these roads in later periods. The
coastal road continued in use in the Roman period and later; nevertheless, the road
passing along Nahal 'Iron and Megiddo remained a major highway. In the Roman
period it formed part of the highway leading from Caesarea Maritima to
Scythopolis. Legio - the Roman period settlement, rbad station and military post
near Tel Megiddo - was situated along the highway (see Isaac and Roll 1982:3-16).
The military advantages ofthis road (and of the two side roads mentioned above,
which cross the Mount Carmel Ridge to the north and south of the Nahal Iron
highway) in comparison with the coastal road can be observed till modern times.
Napoleon Bonaparte, advancing from the south in the direction of Acre in 1799
C.E., avoided the coastal road, and crossed the Mount Carmel Ridge through the
262
road opening onto the Valley of Jezreel near Tel Jokneam.2 In September 1918C.E.
the British army commanded by General Allenby advanced from the south to
attack the Turkish forces holding northern Palestine. The British reached the
Valley of Jezreel by crossing the hilly passes, the 4th Cavalry Division advancing
through the Nahal <Iron route. The British army avoided the coastal road and
reached Haifa and Acrefrom the east (see Advance of the EEF: 29-31; Pis. 43-46).
Our above conclusions (a) that Megiddo was a strong and prosperous
Canaanite/ Egyptian stronghold till ca. 1130 B.C.E. and (b) that the main - and
practically sole - highway from Syria to southern Palestine at that time was
controlled by Megiddo, should be taken into account in any attempt to explain and
date the appearance of the 'Sea Peoples' in Canaan.
First, we have to turn to the inscription and reliefs of Rameses III from Medinet
Habu which describe the sea and land battle against the Sea Peoples in the
Pharaoh's 8th year. Stadelmann (1968), followed by Bietak (1993:293), argued that
both land and sea invasions occurred at the same time in the area of the Nile Delta.
The invaders by land are depicted as families each travelling in an ox-drawn cart;
they are escorted by war chariots and warriors. Such hordes must have come from
the north by using a cardinal land route, and therefore had to pass Megiddo and the
Nahal <Iron gorge before advancing south. As the passage here was held by their
opponents, it can be concluded that the land battle of Rameses III with the Sea
Peoples took place somewhere further to the north than Megiddo.
Recently L.E. Stager (1995) argued that the Philistine invasion and settlement
did not take place by using the land route from the north, rather it was carried out
entirely by sea. The Philistines - according to Stager - formed a "beachhead" in
Philistia and "carved out a major piece of territory for themselves". The newcomers
- "boatload after boatload of Philistines, along with their families, livestock and
belongings" - comprised ca. 25,000 people. If indeed the land battle against the
forces of Rameses III took place in the area of the.Nile Delta, Stager believes that
"the chariotry and ox-carts involved in the battle ... could have been supplied from
their base in southern Canaan" whereto they were brought "by war- and transport
ships". According to this theory, the Philistine entity was established in the
Pentapolis area at the time when other parts of the country were dominated by the
Egyptians and Canaanites - including, naturally, Megiddo and the Via Maris.
2 The military disadvantages of the coastal road were described by Napoleon (Bonaparte 1872:
55): "Carmel se lie aux montagnes de N ablouse, mais elle en est separee par un grand vall on.
On a l'avantage de tourner Mont Carmel par la route qui suit la lisiere de la plaine d'Esdrelon
au lieu que celle qui longe la mer arrive au detroit de Haifa, passage difficile a forcer s'il etait
defendu".
263
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
Reconstruction of the Philistine migration and settlement on the basis of the

above model is hard to accept. First, it is not supported by any factual evidence.
Second, it assumes that the Philistines had at their disposal a large and strong naval
force of a kind unknown in this period. Third, in the period immediately following
their settlement in Philistia there is hardly any archaeological evidence connecting
the Philistine culture and settlement with sea and navigation. Had the Philistines
really possessed such a strong naval force and tradition as suggested by Stager we
would expect to observe these associations in their material culture in later times.
The data regarding Megiddo Stratum VII and the nearby Via Maris have a
bearing on the question of the date of Philistine settlement in southern Canaan. We
assume that the immigration of the Philistines to the coastal plain in southern
Canaan was carried out on a considerable scale. The settlers had families, and their
property was laden on carts. We further assume that these aggressive
settlers j conquerors would have been stopped at Megiddo and Nahal 'Iron and
prevented from continuing southwards by Canaanitej Egyptian forces. Hence 1130
B.C.E. serves also as a terminus post quem for the immigration and settlement of
the Philistines in the coastal plain.
The above considerations support similar chronological conclusions which were
reached on the basis of different data. The archaeological evidence from Tel
Lachish indicates, in my opinion, that neither monochrome nor bichrome Philistine
pottery appeared in Philistia before the destruction of Lachish Level VI, which did
not occur before ca. 1150 B.C.E., and probably not before ca. 1130 B.C.E.
(Ussishkin 1983:170; 1985:222-223). A similar date for the settlement of the
Philistines in southern Canaan has now been convincingly argued by Finkelstein
(1995) on the basis of a wider range of data; this dating was labelled by him
'Philistine low chronology'.3
Finally, I shall turn briefly to the question of the end of the Bronze Age in
Palestine. The generally accepted date of 1200 B.C.E. was chosen back in 1922 by J.
Garstang, the Director of Antiquities, in co-operation with the heads of the three
official Schools of Archaeology in Jerusalem, when they introduced their scheme
for the division of archaeological periods in Palestine. Following the excavation of
Lachish I argued for lowering this date to 1150 B.C.E., adopting the disintegration
of the. Egyptian administration and the collapse of the Canaanite, Egyptian-
dominated cities as the main event heralding the advent of a new period (see
detailed arguments in Ussishkin 1985:224-226). The case of Megiddo Stratum VII
supports this suggested adjustment (and illustrates the need for it). However, on the
3 On the other hand, our conclusions contradict Finkelstein's theory of an earlier Sea People's
campaign to the coastal plain south of the Mount Carmel Ridge ca. 1175 B.C.E.
264
basis of the evidence from Megiddo it seems that a date of 1130B.C.E. for the end of
the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age in Palestine would be more
correct.4
4 I am indebted to Prof. Israel Finkelstein, Prof. N adav N a'aman and Ms. Orna Zimhoni who
read the paper and made valuable comments. A paper based on this study was read on 4th
April 1995 at the symposium on "Mediterranean Peoples in Transition: Thirteenth to Early
Tenth Centuries B.C.E." at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The plan and schematic
sections in Figs. I and 6 were prepared by Ora Paran. The plans and illustrations in Figs. 2-5,
8, 14-15 are reproduced from Megiddo II: Figs. 63, 71, 259-260, 382-384 with the kind
permission of the Chicago Oriental Institute. The illustration in Fig. 7 is after Kempinski
1989: PI. 12. The photographs in Figs. 9-13 were taken by Pavel Shrago.
REFERENCES
Advance of the EEF. A Brief Record of the Advance of the Egyptian Expeditionary
Force under the Command of General Sir Edmund H.H. Allenby, G. C.B.,
G.C.M.G. July 1917 to October 1918. Compiled from Official Sources.
London, 2nd ed., 1919.
Avnimelech, M. 1959. Remarks on the Geological Features of the Surroundings of
Tell Abu Hawam and the Cemetery in the Area of the Qishon Mouth. 'Atiqot
2:103-105. (English Series).
Albright, W.F. 1936. The Song of Deborah in the Light of Archaeology. BASOR
62:26-31.
Bietak, M. 1993. The Sea Peoples and the End of the Egyptian Administration in
Canaan. In: Biblical Archaeology Today, 1990. Proceedings of the Second
International Congress on Biblical Archaeology, Jerusalem, June-July 1990.
Jerusalem: 292-306.
Bonaparte, N. 1872. Campagnes d'Egypte et de Syrie. Memoires ... dictees par lui
meme. vol. II. Paris.
Dothan, T. 1982. The Philistines and their Material Culture. Jerusalem.
Engberg, R.M. 1940. Historical Analysis or Archaeological Evidence: Megiddo
and the Song of Deborah. BASOR 78:4-7.
Esse, D.L. 1992. The Collared Pithos at Megiddo: Ceramic Distribution and
Ethnicity. JNES 51:81-103.
Finkelstein, I. 1995. The Date of the Settlement of the Philistines in Canaan. Tel
Aviv 22:213-239.
Galling, K. 1938. Die syrisch-paHistinische Ktiste nach der Beschreibung bei
Pseudo-Skylax. ZDPV 61:66-87.
Gonen, R. 1987. Megiddo in the Late Bronze Age - Another Reassessment.
Levant 19:83-100.
265
Tel Aviv 22 (1995)
Isaac, B. and Roll, 1. 1982. Roman Roads in Judaea I: The Legio - Scythopolis
Road. (BAR International Series 141). Oxford .
. Kempinski, A. 1989. Megiddo, A City-State and Royal Centre in North Israel.
Munich.
Kenyon, K.M. 1969. The Middle and Late Bronze Age Strata at Megiddo. Levant
1:25-60.
Kitchen, K.A. 1984. Ramses V-Xl. In: Lexikon der Agyptologie V. Wiesbaden:
124-128.
Lachish III. Tufnell, O. 1953. Lachish III, The Iron Age. London.
Liebowitz, H. 1987. Late Bronze II Ivory Work in Palestine: Evidence of a Cultural
Highpoint. BASOR 265:3-24.
Loud, G. 1939. The Megiddo Ivories. (Oriental Institute Publications 52). Chicago.
Luckenbill, D.D. 1927.Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia. Vol. II. Chicago.
Mazar, A. 1985. The Emergence of the Philistine Material Culture. IE135:95-107.
Megiddo II. Loud, G. 1948. Megiddo IL Seasons of 1935-39. (Oriental Institute
Publications 62). Chicago.
Singer, I. 1988. Merneptah's Campaign to Canaan and the Egyptian Occupation of
the Southern Coastal Plain of Palestine in the Ramesside Period. BASOR
269:1-10.
Singer, I. 1988-1989. The Political Status of Megiddo VIlA. Tel Aviv
15-16:101-112.
Stadelmann, R. 1968. Die Abwehr der Seevolker unter Ramses III. Saeculum
19:156-171.
Stager, L.E. 1995. The Impact of the Sea Peoples in Canaan (1185-1050 BCE). In:
Levy, T.E. ed. The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. London:
332-348.
Ussishkin, D. 1970. The Syro-Hittite Ritual Burial of Monuments. JNES
29:124-128.
Ussishkin, D. 1978. Excavations at Tel Lachish - 1973-1977, Preliminary Report.
Tel Aviv 5:1-97.
Ussishkin, D. 1983. Excavations at Tel Lachish 1978-1983: Second Preliminary
Report. Tel Aviv 10:97-175.
Ussishkin, D. 1985. Levels VII and VI at Tel Lachish and the End of the Late
Bronze Age in Canaan. In: Tubb, J.N. ed. Palestine in the Bronze and Iron
Ages. Papers in Honour of Olga Tufnell. London: 213-230.
Ussishkin, D. 1990. Notes on Megiddo, Gezer, Ashdod, and Tel Batash in the
Tenth to Ninth Centuries B.C. RASOR 277(278:71-91.
Weinstein, J.M. 1974. A Statuette of the Princess Sobeknefru at Tell Gezer.
BASOR 213:49-57.
266
Weinstein, J. 1992. The Collapse of the Egyptian Empire in the Southern Levant.
In: Ward, W.A. and Joukowsky, M.S. eds. The Crisis Years: The 12th
Century B. C. From Beyond the Danube to the Tigris. Dubuque, Iowa:
142-150.
Wente, E.F., and Van Siden, C.C. 1976. A Chronology of the New Kingdom. In:
Johnson, J.R. and Wente, E.F. (eds.) Studies in Honor of George R. Hughes
(Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 39). Chicago: 217-261.
• Williams, B. and Logan, T.J. 1989. Oriental Institute Museum Notes, No. 14: A
Basalt Royal or Divine Figure from Megiddo. JNES 48:125-129.
Woolley, L. 1955. Alalakh, An Account of the Excavations of Tell Atchana in the
Hatay, 1937-1949. Oxford.
Wright, G.E. 1965. Shechem, The Biography of a Biblical City. London.
Yadin, Y., Shiloh, Y. and Eitan, A. 1972. Notes and News: Megiddo. IEJ
22:161-164.
267

The Destruction of Megiddo at The End of PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

The Destruction of Megiddo at The End of PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Destruction of Megiddo at The End of PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE DESTRUCTION OF MEGIDDO AT THE

END OF THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND

Renewed excavations at Tel Megiddo - planned on a long-term, systematic

A. The Destruction of the Stratum VII Palace in Area AA

" The Stratum VIIB palace obviously suffered violent destruction so

Fig. I. A general plan of Tel Megiddo.

to the corresponding part in Stratum VIIB, since marked similarity prevails

B. The Excavation in the Late Bronze Age Gatehouse in Area AA

A large, well-preserved gatehouse was uncovered by the Chicago Oriental

....••. " .•........•........

,-.......'.:: -....... -......'..:. //////////

VilA Debris '::. //////////

............................. ' . //////////

/' VIIBFloor, / / , / !-q~er ,FJ0'or'/

initiated and directed by S. Ben-David, the manager of the national parks in

In our small-scale excavation (labelled Area G) we completed the excavation of

Fig. 9. The recleared gatehouse in 1993, from north.

c. The 'Tower Temple' in Area BB

D. The End of the Late Bronze Age City

of the Stratum VIlA city.

predominantly by the population which survived the destruction of the Stratum

E. Historical and Archaeological Implications

The special importance of Megiddo in the historical and archaeological study of

Reconstruction of the Philistine migration and settlement on the basis of the

You might also like