Download and Read online, DOWNLOAD EBOOK, [PDF EBOOK EPUB ], Ebooks

download, Read Ebook EPUB/KINDE, Download Book Format PDF

The Oxford Illustrated History of the Holy Land

H.G.M. Williamson Et Al.

OR CLICK LINK
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-oxford-
illustrated-history-of-the-holy-land-h-g-m-
williamson-et-al/

Read with Our Free App Audiobook Free Format PFD EBook, Ebooks dowload PDF
with Andible trial, Real book, online, KINDLE , Download[PDF] and Read and Read
Read book Format PDF Ebook, Dowload online, Read book Format PDF Ebook,
[PDF] and Real ONLINE Dowload [PDF] and Real ONLINE
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Oxford Illustrated History Of The Book James Raven

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-oxford-illustrated-history-
of-the-book-james-raven/

The Oxford Illustrated History of the World Felipe

Fernández-Armesto

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-oxford-illustrated-history-
of-the-world-felipe-fernandez-armesto/

The Archaeology of the Holy Land Jodi Magness

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-archaeology-of-the-holy-
land-jodi-magness/

The Oxford Illustrated History of the Renaissance 1st

Edition Gordon Campbell

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-oxford-illustrated-history-
of-the-renaissance-1st-edition-gordon-campbell/
The Oxford Illustrated History of Modern China Jeffrey
N. Wasserstrom

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-oxford-illustrated-history-
of-modern-china-jeffrey-n-wasserstrom/

The Oxford illustrated history of science First Edition

Iwan Rhys Morus

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-oxford-illustrated-history-
of-science-first-edition-iwan-rhys-morus/

The Oxford illustrated history of the Reformation First

Published In Paperback Edition Marshall

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-oxford-illustrated-history-
of-the-reformation-first-published-in-paperback-edition-marshall/

The Oxford Illustrated History of Witchcraft and Magic

1st Edition Owen Davies

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-oxford-illustrated-history-
of-witchcraft-and-magic-1st-edition-owen-davies/

Oxford Textbook of Clinical Nephrology 4th Edition Neil

Turner Et Al. (Eds.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/oxford-textbook-of-clinical-
nephrology-4th-edition-neil-turner-et-al-eds/
THE OXFORD ILLUSTRATED HISTORY OF THE
HOLY LAND
The  historians who contributed to The Oxford Illustrated History of the
Holy Land are all distinguished authorities in their field. They are:

 . , Yale Divinity School

 , Bar-Ilan University
 , writer and journalist
 . , University of Hull
 . , Denver Seminary
 , University of Edinburgh
 . , New York University
 , University of Bamberg
 É , École Pratique des Hautes Études
 -, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
 , Western Galilee College
 , Cardiff University
 , Bar-Ilan University
 , Trinity School for Ministry
. . . , University of Oxford
THE OXFORD ILLUSTRATED
HISTORY OF THE

HOLY LAND

Edited by
ROBERT G. HOYLAND
H. G. M. WILLIAMSON

1
 3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford,  ,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Oxford University Press 
The moral rights of the authors have been asserted
First Edition published in 
Impression: 
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
 Madison Avenue, New York, NY , United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 
ISBN ––––
Printed in Italy by
L.E.G.O. S.p.A.—Lavis TN
 CONTENTS

List of Maps vii

Introduction 
. The Birth of Israel 
Avraham Faust

. Iron Age: Tribes to Monarchy 

Lester L. Grabbe

. Israel and Judah, c.–  

André Lemaire

. Babylonian Exile and Restoration, –  

H. G. M. Williamson

. The Hellenistic and Roman Era 

John J. Collins

. A Christian Holy Land, –  

Konstantin Klein

. The Coming of Islam 

Milka Levy-Rubin

. The Holy Land in the Crusader and Ayyubid Periods,

– 
Carole Hillenbrand

. The Holy Land from the Mamluk Sultanate to the

Ottoman Empire, – 
Nimrod Luz
vi Contents

. From Napoleon to Allenby: The Holy Land and

the Wider Middle East 
Robert Fisk

. Pilgrimage 

Peter Walker with Robert G. Hoyland

. Sacred Spaces and Holy Places 

Richard S. Hess and Denys Pringle

. Scripture and the Holy Land 

Adam Silverstein

Further Reading 

Index 
Picture Acknowledgements 
 LIST OF MAPS

 Map of the Holy Land in the earliest Israelite period 

 The Holy Land in the period of the Israelite monarchies 
 The cities of the Decapolis 
 Map of the Holy Land under Roman occupation in the first
century 
 Map of the late antique Holy Land and neighbouring regions 
 Map of the Crusader states in Palestine, Syria, and Anatolia 
 Location of sacred spaces and holy places 
 Introduction

I an aide-memoire following the First World War, the British Prime Minister
David Lloyd George wrote to his French opposite number Georges Clémenceau that
Palestine was to be ‘defined in accordance with its ancient boundaries of Dan to
Beersheba’. Lloyd George had been steeped in the Bible from his childhood, so that it
is understandable, if politically astonishing, that he should have allowed his instinctive
memory to influence his approach to modern political realities.
Different names and geographical definitions bedevil the history of this part of
the world and none can do justice to the sweep of what we have set out to describe
in the present volume. Precisely for that reason we have deliberately chosen the title
Holy Land, a familiar name which has never featured on any map worth its salt. It serves
to indicate that our intention here is far from political—and that is one good reason
why we have called a halt in our historical survey at just the point where Lloyd George
was clarifying his thoughts on the post-war settlement. But just as we have stopped
short of the modern era, so we have not included anything about the thousands of
years of occupation which preceded the biblical period. The Carmel Caves, for
instance, have yielded evidence of some of the earliest human occupation known
worldwide, a testimony to the geographical centrality of the region as a link between
Africa and Europe. Jericho has often been called the word’s first city, and archaeology
has revealed much about human occupation throughout the millennia since then.
The Holy Land, however, conjures up an approach to territory which is more
cultural, and specifically religious, than political, however closely intertwined the
two were until relatively recently. This modest strip of land saw the birth of two
world religions, Judaism and Christianity, and was of central significance to a third
from its earliest days, Islam. It is sobering to recall that Jerusalem has been taken by
military force by adherents of each of these three religions; no other city anywhere is of
such central religious importance to each. It was therefore inevitable that we should
begin our history with Abraham, whom each religion reveres. It is worth reflecting that
according to our texts he owned no property in this land apart from a tomb, however,
and that he had only limited engagement with the resident population.
The expression ‘Holy Land’ itself occurs first, and then only once, in the Hebrew
Bible, at Zechariah :: ‘The Lord will inherit Judah as his portion in the holy land, and
will again choose Jerusalem’. These words were written quite late in the Old Testament/
 Introduction

Hebrew Bible period, after the return of the Judeans from their exile in Babylon from
  onwards. The area was no longer independent at this time but divided between
several provinces in the mighty Persian Empire. Neither here nor elsewhere are precise
geographical divisions supplied. We are used to referring to the Holy Land in the much
earlier period as Canaan, but that too did not exist as a single entity; it comprised a
number of minor independent city-states under the overarching hegemony of Egypt.
Then came the Israelites, and we eventually have two kingdoms during the first half of
the first millennium —Israel in the northern part and Judah (including Jerusalem)
in the south. But to the west, along part of the Mediterranean coast, there were the
Philistines, so that even then the territory was not united. And in that period
the nearest we come to the expression ‘Holy Land’ refers initially to an area outside
the land of Israel altogether, namely God’s ‘holy abode’ on Mount Sinai in Exodus :,
echoing the ‘holy ground’ where Moses encountered God in the burning bush at
Exodus :. From there we approach our more familiar usage when Psalm :
reminds the worshippers in the Jerusalem temple that God ‘brought them to his
holy border, the mountain that his right hand had won’.
Still, this is thin pickings for what became so influential a name in later centuries.
It occurs a few times in early apocryphal Jewish writings after the close of the Old
Testament period and then more frequently in the later rabbinic sources. It is com-
pletely absent, however, from the foundation documents of the Christian faith in the
New Testament, and it did not become common Christian parlance (as Terra Sancta)
until the Middle Ages, no doubt reflecting the attitude of European Crusaders and
pilgrims. Accordingly, its use for maps has tended to be restricted to those included in
Bibles, where the name is used anachronistically and without proper regard for either
ancient or modern political realities. Medieval Muslims took some interest in the term
because it appears in the Qur’an, where Moses is recorded as instructing the Israelites to
‘enter the holy land, which God has ordained for you’, though scholars were at odds
over the definition of this term. The legal scholar Muhammad al-Tabari (d. ), for
example, says he knows of four main possibilities: ‘Mount Sinai and its environs’,
‘Jericho’, ‘al-Sham’ (which corresponds roughly to our term ‘The Levant’), and ‘Palestine
and part of Jordan’. Yet the term did not enjoy circulation outside academic circles;
rather, attention was paid to specific cities and sites, especially Jerusalem (simply called
al-Quds, ‘holiness’, or Bayt al-Maqdis, ‘house of sanctity’) and the Temple Mount.
It fits with this spasmodic witness from antiquity that the region is not carefully
defined; in the biblical reference cited above it seems to be restricted to Judah, a tiny
part of what we usually mean by the term. In subsequent centuries its implicit
definition will have varied according to the prevailing political and administrative
circumstances. As with the varying definitions of the extent of the land in the Hebrew
Bible, so subsequently the various regions within the southern Levant may be included
or excluded as appropriate. While a basic working definition could be the land between
the Jordan river on the east and the Mediterranean on the west, and between the Sinai
desert in the south and the Hermon range in the north, the territory to the east of the
 Introduction 

Jordan was sometimes an integral part of the land as well, while at other times areas in
the north or the west were effectively excluded. As editors we have deliberately allowed
our contributors freedom to concentrate on the natural geographical and national
borders that suit their period of study most appropriately (see Map ). Equally, it should
be added, attention to some regions quite apart from the Holy Land itself has some-
times been imperative in order to understand what was going on there (Babylon in the
biblical period, Europe at the time of the Crusades, and Turkey during the Ottoman
period, for instance); to exclude such material could not be justified.
Two special features mark this Illustrated History from some others and so deserve
comment. First, in addition to the expected historical survey (which, incidentally, covers
some  years, so that it cannot always enter into great detail), we have included three
chapters on themes which transcend specific periods of history but which, in their
different ways, are important to each of the three major religions and which, further-
more, contribute to the notion of a Holy Land: pilgrimage, sacred space, and Scripture.
These are huge topics, of course, and so can effectively only be introduced here, but
without including them we should not be able to do justice to some of the major
underlying motives and values which drove the significant political actors.
Second, it is likely that, for the early period at least, most readers’ knowledge will
derive from the Bible, and for many this remains an inspired source for religious belief
and practice. Our greatly increased knowledge of the ancient world both from arch-
aeological discoveries and from newly discovered texts of ancient Israel’s neighbours
shows that we have to tread carefully when assessing the Bible from a purely historical
point of view. It is far from our intention to cause any offence or deliberately to
challenge personal beliefs, so we have asked all our authors to write with consideration
towards those for whom a strictly historical approach may be unfamiliar. The fact
remains, however, that these ancient texts were not written according to the methods
or standards of modern historians and their purpose was religious, moral, or didactic,
using at the same time all the stylistic skills they could bring to their task. We do not
believe that the results of modern historical research are in any way incompatible with
the continuing use of the Bible as scripture. Nevertheless, it seems only right to warn
readers in advance that the ‘story’ of ancient history may not always coincide with
inherited preconceptions. Our hope is that all may nevertheless learn from, as well as
enjoy, this summary of current understanding, and that through such understanding
appreciation of what each of the faiths had to offer may be deepened without the
hostile fragmentation which has characterized much of the history we trace here and
which still, sadly, is prevalent in the modern world.
  

The Birth of Israel

 

The beginning of Israel: the biblical narrative

T well-known biblical story of Israel’s birth and emergence is the story of a family,
and how it became a people. Abraham left his home in Mesopotamia and emigrated to
Canaan. This is where he lived with his wife, Sarah, and his children Isaac and Ishmael.
His grandchild (Isaac’s son)—Jacob—and his great-grandchildren went down to Egypt,
as an extended family or a lineage (hamulah). They stayed there for a few generations,
multiplied, were then enslaved, and eventually left in the epic story of the Exodus, led
by Moses. After forty years of wandering in the Sinai desert, they finally entered Canaan
under the leadership of Joshua, and conquered it. Joshua’s campaign began with the
conquest of Jericho, where the Israelites, through the help of a local harlot by the name
of Rahab, conquered the city after encircling it for seven days, blowing rams’ horns
until the city walls miraculously crumbled. This was followed by the eventual conquest
of the city of ‘Ai, and Joshua’s campaigns against coalitions of kings in the southern
and northern parts of Canaan. Following the conquest, the land was divided between
the various tribes, named after Jacob’s descendants. Despite a few side-stories that
interrupt its flow (like the story of Judah and Tamar in Genesis ), the story is very
clear, and the narrative flows quite smoothly.

Problems with the narrative

Still, the story is not completely uniform, and it includes some intriguing features.
Thus, although Abraham continued to live for fifteen years after Jacob’s birth, the story
never mentions them meeting, and while Isaac, Abraham’s son and Jacob’s father, is
mentioned in connection with both figures, Abraham and Jacob never interact.
Another feature that raises some eyebrows lies in the apparent contradiction between
the account of the conquest in the book of Joshua, and the description of the land that
was not conquered (in both the books of Joshua and Judges). Thus, cities like Gezer,
Megiddo, and Ta’anach, are explicitly mentioned as being conquered by Joshua ( Josh.
:, ), but also appear in the description of the remaining land that was not
 The Birth of Israel 

. Map of the Holy Land in the earliest Israelite period

 Avraham Faust

conquered ( Judg. :, ). These are but two examples out of many, and to such
inconsistencies one has to add the growing discrepancies between the available
historical and archaeological information we possess and some parts of the biblical
narrative. Thus, as we shall see below under the section ‘Archaeological background’,
during much of the period discussed, Canaan was under Egyptian rule, but this is not
acknowledged in the biblical stories. And while such discrepancies, or missing data,
might be explained one way or another, there are even more direct contradictions
between the biblical narrative and the historical and archaeological data at our
disposal; for example, cities that are mentioned in the conquest stories in the Bible
(like ‘Ai) did not in fact exist at the time when the stories are supposed to have taken
place (we will discuss the chronology in more detail below under ‘Chronological
framework’). Such discrepancies gradually eroded the historical validity of the texts.
The growing understanding (beginning centuries ago, of course) that the texts were
written down many years after the events they were supposed to describe took place,
that they went through a long process of transmission, and that they were exten-
sively edited for various (mainly theological) purposes, only exacerbated the texts’
reliability problem, casting more doubts on the historicity of large portions of the
well-known narratives.
Other elements in the stories seem to be more in line with what is known on the basis
of modern research, and the process of the Israelite settlement in the more mountainous
parts of the country, rather than in the valleys and plains, can be identified archaeologic-
ally (perhaps in accordance with the information supplied in Joshua :–; :; and
throughout the book of Judges, where the mountainous regions are the core of the
Israelite settlement). The name Israel is attested in an Egyptian victory stela, dated to this
period (late th century ). Other elements of the narrative are to a large extent beyond
the realm of modern scholarship. Thus, while the background that is reflected in the
stories about the Patriarchs and Matriarchs can be (and is) debated, their existence, and
the historicity of the stories about these individuals and their small families, is largely
outside the scope of scholarship. After all, we cannot expect to find documents or
artefacts related to individuals, or even a family, after almost  years, and as we
shall see below under ‘The Israelite settlement: assessing the evidence’, even the exact
background behind the stories continues to elude scholars.
It seems, therefore, that while some parts of the biblical narrative (at least some of
its general outlines) appear to be in line with modern research, other parts are
seriously challenged (if not completely undermined) by it, and some elements of the
story remain outside scholarship’s domain, or are, at best, at its fringes. Consequently,
there is not much agreement among scholars about any aspect of Israel’s early
history or the historicity of the Bible. Some scholars view the biblical narrative as
mostly reliable testimony for history, while others deny any historical value to the
texts, and view them as a very late, literary creation which is of practically no use for
the study of the periods it purportedly describes. Most scholars are located somewhere
along a broad spectrum between these two extreme views.
 The Birth of Israel 

So how can we proceed and reconstruct the story of Israel’s emergence in Canaan?
It appears that a combination of the vast archaeological data we possess and the
(more limited) historical information at our disposal, through a very careful and critical
reference to the biblical narratives, can allow us to reconstruct Israel’s development.
While very little can be viewed as a consensus among scholars, this chapter aims to
present a plausible middle ground between the two more extreme approaches. We will
begin our journey by presenting the chronological framework, and since the biblical
story, briefly summarized above, is probably familiar, we will proceed by describing
the situation in Canaan in the second millennium , in the periods which are usually
known by the names Middle Bronze Age (roughly /– ), Late Bronze
Age (roughly – ), and Iron Age I (roughly – ). We will then
summarize the debate regarding the Israelite settlement, and proceed to offer a broad
reconstruction of the processes through which Israel emerged in Canaan: we will review
the group’s early developments, until the formation of the monarchy in the Iron Age II
(in the th century, according to most scholars; see Chapter ), and will suggest some
possible insights into the way the biblical story—as we know it today—evolved.

Chronological framework
Attempting to synchronize the archaeological periods with the biblical events and
stories is not always a straightforward enterprise. The dating of archaeological periods
addressed in this chapter, while relying on synchronisms with adjacent regions, was
developed largely independently of the biblical narratives, and stands on its own. This
statement might seem somewhat surprising, given how much biblical archaeology
developed in the shadow of the biblical texts. Still, although nobody would deny that
biblical texts influenced the archaeological inquiry in the Holy Land, scholars were
usually critical (at least, by the standards of their time) and did not simplistically accept
the biblical framework. The dating of the Israelite settlement in Canaan is a good
example of this. The Israelite settlement is dated by most scholars, from all schools of
thought, including those who accepted the historicity of the conquest narratives in the
book of Joshua, to (roughly) – , and its beginning is dated to the late
th century at the earliest. As we shall presently see, chronologies that are based on
the Bible alone date the conquest to about  . This -year gap suggests that
archaeologists followed the archaeological data, and rejected the biblical chronology
when they found that the two did not match (although this does not negate the
significance of the biblical chronology in influencing the general landscape of historical
reconstruction). Nowadays, many of the dates are decided on the basis of scientific
methods, mainly carbon  dating, which somewhat changes the traditional dating of
some periods.
Biblical chronology, of course, relies first and foremost on the dates supplied in the
Bible. One can create a chronological sequence that incorporates the period of the
Patriarchs, and even the descent to Egypt and the slavery there, and a biblical chronology
 Avraham Faust

of the period of the monarchy in Israel and Judah can also clearly be compiled. The first
part—that of the Patriarchs and the slavery in Egypt—is of course much more problematic
and relies on a few sketchy and sometimes contradictory pieces of information, while the
chronology of the period of the monarchy is more reliable. The most problematic feature,
however, is the attempt to connect the two parts—the period of the Patriarchs and the
sojourn in Egypt on the one hand and that of the monarchy on the other—something
which relies on just one verse.  Kings : states that the construction of the Temple by
Solomon was completed  years after the Exodus. Since the construction of the Temple
was dated by many to around   (though it might well have been somewhat later),
then the Exodus, which ended the period of slavery in Egypt, should have occurred in about
 , and the conquest of Canaan (after forty years in the desert) at about  .
And the Patriarchs lived a few hundred years earlier (the exact time of the Patriarchs
depends on which biblical verses one uses to create the chronology).
The biblical chronology, however, is not only sketchy, but even the available data
are problematic on a number of counts. First of all, many of the numbers that are
mentioned in the texts seem typological. Forty years, for example, is used quite often,
and seems to designate a lengthy period of time—perhaps a generation—rather than
an exact duration of time. Additionally, did the Patriarchs (and other biblical figures)
really live for so many years— years for Abraham, for example? Or are the numbers
exaggerated? Even the  years that supposedly separated the Exodus from the
completion of the temple in Jerusalem—the only figure that connects the more reliable
dates of the later monarchy with those of Israel’s prehistory—seems typological, and a
number of scholars have pointed out that it might have been a result of a schematized
counting of twelve generations (of forty years each). Thus, a more realistic figure for
twelve generations would be – years, and would date the Exodus, and by
extension the settlement in Canaan, to the th, even the late th century (we shall
return to this issue below under ‘Israel’s emergence’).
The problematic nature of the biblical chronology is exemplified by the debate over
the date of the patriarchal narratives. Even scholars who consider the stories to reflect a
specific historical background vary greatly in dating them, and the dates supplied cover
approximately a millennium. This great variation is partly the result of some scholars
not accepting the biblical sequence of events as such. Still, many of those who accept
the biblical sequence of events as broadly historical simply use its very unclear nature
to support the period in which they find more cultural and social parallels to the
background which is reflected in the stories. Most of the latter, however, place them
somewhere between – .
When discussing the Exodus and the settlement, the situation is somewhat clearer.
As noted, a literal reading of I Kings : would place the Exodus in the th century , and
the conquest of Canaan at the beginning of the th, but we have seen that a more critical
reading of the verse will direct us to the th century , and this seems to be more in line
with the external evidence at our disposal (see the following section).
We will now begin our archaeological survey, which supplies the background for Israel’s
emergence, at the beginning of the nd millennium —in the Middle Bronze Age.
 The Birth of Israel 

Archaeological background
During the Middle Bronze Age (roughly /– ) Canaan experienced
intensive urbanization, especially in the low-lying parts of the country, and to a more
limited extent also in the highlands. Many cities were surrounded by massive earth-
works, which gave the mounds their present form and to a large extent even created
the Levantine landscape of today, which is dotted by mounds. The political structure of
the era is not completely clear, but it is likely that the country was divided between
many independent or semi-independent city-states. The period is regarded as repre-
senting a demographic peak in the area more generally, and some scholars estimate the
population as about , (west of the Jordan). Although the figure is far from
certain, and is questioned on many grounds, it does suggest, when compared with the
demographic estimates of other periods, the prosperity of the period, something also
reflected in the settlement remains uncovered by archaeologists. The relations with
Egypt during the time of the Middle Kingdom are not clear. The Execration Texts are
groups of texts, uncovered in Egypt, in which names of local rulers in Canaan were
inscribed on bowls or figurines and were apparently used for voodoo-like purposes,
probably to secure their rulers’ loyalty to Egypt. The existence of these texts might
suggest that the Egyptians felt some authority over the region but this is not certain. In
the later part of the Middle Bronze Age (known in Egyptian history as the Second
Intermediate Period) Asian/Canaanite dynasties (known as the Hyksos) ruled over
much of lower (northern) Egypt (the Nile delta), and the region was extensively settled
by Canaanites who maintained close connections with Canaan itself.
During the th century  the Hyksos were ousted and were replaced by the th
dynasty (often referred to as the ‘Hyksos expulsion’)—an episode that also marks the
beginning of the New Kingdom of Egypt. This triggered many campaigns into Canaan,
and many cities were devastated in the course of the century. Many archaeologists
consider this as the beginning of the Late Bronze Age (roughly – ).
Although there is much continuity in culture between the two periods, the settlement
and demography were greatly affected by the campaigns, and despite gradual recovery
during the Late Bronze Age the country did not recover its Middle Bronze Age
demographic peak until some point in the Iron Age. Population estimates for the
end of the Late Bronze Age (i.e. after the recovery from the nadir of the th century)
are between ,–,, and although the figures are uncertain, the comparison
with the Middle Bronze Age estimate is quite telling. Settlements were concentrated in
the lower parts of the country, and the highlands were only sparsely settled. From
at least the th century, the country was apparently nominally subjugated to Egypt,
and this situation prevailed through the th dynasty (roughly the th century )
and well into the time of the th dynasty (until the middle of the th century or
slightly later). As part of their rule over Canaan, the Egyptians built garrisons in a few
places (e.g. Gaza, Jaffa, Beth Shean), and the rest of the country was divided between
many city-states, which were vassals of Egypt. Egyptian sources, and especially the
Amarna letters (th century ), supply a wealth of information on the political
  Avraham Faust

and social organization in Canaan at the time, and we know of the existence of many
marginal groups which were active outside the settlements, and whose activity led to
severe unrest. Most notable among these groups are the notorious Habiru, composed of
outcasts or exiled people from various backgrounds, who seem to have caused much
unrest throughout the country (such groups were already known in earlier periods).
It is a common accusation made by vassal Canaanite princes that their opponents are
collaborating with the Habiru. Another group (or groups) mentioned in the Egyptian
sources is that of the Shasu—tribal groups of pastoral nomads that were active outside
the settled areas or on their fringes in both Cisjordan (i.e. west of the river Jordan) and
Transjordan (i.e. east of it). Towards the end of the period—during the th and
early th centuries—the Egyptians apparently strengthened their hold over Canaan.
Archaeologically, this is expressed, for example, by the construction of the so-called
Egyptian governors’ residencies.
The material culture of the period reflects the existence of many social groups and
social classes. Imported pottery is abundant, and some scholars refer to a period of
internationalism. Decoration on local pottery is common and was probably used
to convey differences between classes and groups. While not many dwellings have
been excavated in their entirety, many public buildings, including palaces and
temples, are known to archaeologists, reflecting the social distinctions and hierarchy
that characterized this period. This is also reflected in burials: hundreds of burials
of various types are known from this period, and the differences between them
were probably also used to convey social differences between groups, families, and
even individuals.
A series of events, beginning in the late th century and ending around the middle
of the th century, marks the end of the Late Bronze Age and the transition to the Iron
Age in the region. These include the fall of the Mycenean civilization, the demise of
the Hittite empire, the destruction of various major cities like Ugarit, and eventually
Egypt’s withdrawal from Canaan and its political decline. As far as Canaan is con-
cerned, these large-scale changes (marking the beginning of the Iron Age) were
accompanied by a decline in many of the urban centres that existed in Canaan—
mainly in the lower parts of the country—as well as by the emergence of two

An ivory knife handle from Megiddo, depicting Canaanite palace court scenes and reflecting the highly
hierarchical social structure of the Canaanite cities.
 The Birth of Israel 

A ceramic assemblage from Shiloh, showing typical forms of the earliest Israelite settlement.

additional phenomena: the Sea People, most notably the Philistines, who came from
somewhere in the Aegean world or its fringes and settled in the southern coastal plain,
and the Israelite settlement in the highlands.
The term ‘Israelite settlement’ refers to hundreds of small sites that were established
during Iron Age I—beginning at some point in the second half of the th century—in
the highlands of Canaan in both Cisjordan and Transjordan, and mainly in the area
north of Jerusalem, in the region of Samaria. Most of the settlements were quite small,
less than one hectare in size, and were not densely settled. Many of the houses were
long houses, of the type that later crystallized into the well-known four-room house
which dominated the urban landscape of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the Iron
Age II (th–th centuries ), and the economy was based on a mixture of grazing,
growing grains, and the cultivation of olives and vines. The material culture uncovered
in these sites was quite rudimentary, and included a very limited ceramic repertoire that
was composed mainly of large pithoi (mainly of the type known as the collared rim
jar), cooking pots, and bowls.
 Avraham Faust

A bronze bull figurine discovered near an open, cultic site in northern Samaria, subsequently
known as the ‘Bull Site’. The simple nature of the site reflects the nature of the local society, which
probably lacked a specialized class of priests.

The pottery was simple and undecorated and did not include imported pottery, not
even the highly decorated Philistine pottery that was produced in the nearby southern
coastal plain, and which constituted nearly  per cent of the assemblage in many
th-century sites there. Hardly any burials are known from these villages, probably
because the population buried their dead in simple inhumations in the ground.
The association of these sites with the Israelites was based not only on the (rough)
temporal and (more exact) spatial correspondence with the biblical testimony regard-
ing the areas in which the Israelites settled, but also on the clear connections between
the culture unearthed in these settlements and the culture of the kingdoms of Israel and
Judah of Iron Age II, as well as the reference in an Egyptian stela by a Pharaoh called
Merneptah to an ethnic group that he called Israel. The stela is dated to the late
th century, and although the exact location of this group is not stated, most scholars
view it as referring to the settlement phenomenon described above, or part of it.
 The Birth of Israel 

The stele of the late th-century Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah which contains
the earliest reference to Israel outside the Bible.
 Avraham Faust

The Israelite settlement: the growing debate

While the Israelite identity of the settlers was not questioned until recently, there was a
major debate on the process through which the settlements came to be. Albrecht Alt, a
German biblical scholar, noted as long ago as  that there is a discrepancy between
the description of a military conquest of the entire country, as depicted in the main
narratives in the book of Joshua, and the situation on the ground following the
conquest as described in the narratives in the books of Judges, – Samuel, and
the descriptions of the remaining land in Joshua :–; Judges :–, in which the
Israelites settled only parts of the country, mainly in the highlands. Moreover, from the
Egyptian sources that relate to Late Bronze Age Canaan prior to the appearance of
the Israelites, it appears that the Canaanite centres of settlement were concentrated
in the valleys, the Shephelah (the low-lying region between the Judean hill country
and the coastal plain), and the coast, whereas the highlands were only sparsely settled
prior to the Israelite settlement. Comparing the Late Bronze Age Canaanite settlement
distribution with that of the later Israelite settlement made it clear, argued Alt, that the
Israelites settled in less hospitable regions that were largely devoid of Canaanite
settlement anyway. This picture, of settlement in sparsely populated and inhospitable
regions, does not correspond with a military conquest in which the conquerors
annihilate the entire country and can settle wherever they choose, but rather with a
more peaceful, and mostly non-confrontational process in which the Israelites occu-
pied the sparsely settled regions of the country simply because they were not popu-
lated and so were available for settlement. Alt, therefore, concluded that the Israelite
settlement was a long, gradual, and mainly peaceful process, in which pastoral groups
crossed the Jordan in search of pastoral lands, and gradually settled in the relatively
empty parts of the country.
While the process was mainly peaceful, it was accompanied by occasional confron-
tations and wars. Towards the end of the Iron Age, when Israel’s national history was
composed in Jerusalem (by the so-called Deuteronomistic school, that was probably
active from the th century  onward), the various traditions that commemorated
the warring episodes (some historical, some clearly more mythical in origin) were
combined into the monumental history of Israel. This period of Israel’s history was
situated between the Exodus and the period of the Judges, and attributed to a local hero
of the tribe of Ephraim: Joshua. According to Alt, therefore, the conquest that is
described in the book of Joshua never actually happened. Due to the way it recon-
structs the settlement process, this school of thought is often called the peaceful
infiltration school (or theory).
William F. Albright, sometimes regarded as the doyen of biblical archaeology in its
golden age between the two World Wars, strongly opposed this view. He claimed that
the story in Joshua is historical, at least in its general outlines, and that the Israelite
tribes did conquer Canaan by force. Albright introduced archaeology into the debate,
and argued that archaeological inquiry can prove the historicity of the conquest.
 The Birth of Israel 

A landscape in the hill country of Samaria, typical of the kind of territory in which the new material culture of
the earliest Israelites developed.

He suggested that scholars should excavate Canaanite cities (mainly those mentioned
in the conquest narratives), and should the Late Bronze Age occupation be devastated
towards the end of this period, it would suggest that the conquest traditions are
historical. Albright went on to excavate the mound of Tell Beit Mirsim in the south-
eastern (inner) Shephelah, and was involved in additional projects, where evidence
for violent destruction of the Canaanite cities of the Late Bronze Age was indeed
unearthed. In light of its acceptance of the historicity of the main narratives in the book
of Joshua, this school came to be known as the unified conquest school (or theory).
The debate between these two schools continued throughout most of the twentieth
century, more and more scholars joining in, with figures like the German biblical
scholar Martin Noth and the Israeli archaeologist Yohanan Aharoni taking the leading
role in the peaceful infiltration school, and the American biblical scholar and archae-
ologist George E. Wright, the American biblical scholar John Bright, and the Israeli
archaeologist Yigael Yadin taking the leading role in the unified conquest school.
Members of the latter school stressed the sites in which the Canaanite cities were
devastated and destroyed around the end of the Late Bronze Age (e.g. Tell Beit Mirsim,
Hazor, Lachish, Bethel, and many others), while their opponents emphasized the sites
  Avraham Faust

Tel ‘Eton, a Canaanite site in the foothills west of Hebron, as excavated by the author.

which did not even exist at the time (e.g. Arad, ‘Ai, Jericho), and the large gap between
the destruction of some of the sites that were destroyed—about a century separates the
destruction of Hazor and Lachish—which does not allow these destructions to be
attributed to a single campaign.
Notably, while these two schools were the dominant ones during most of the
twentieth century, additional theories developed over the years. In the s, and
mainly in the s and s, a new approach was developed (mainly by George
Mendenhall and Norman Gottwald), which viewed the settlers as being mainly of
Canaanite descent, and as local peasants who rebelled against their overlords, and fled
to the highlands, where they met a small group of people who did come from Egypt,
and together they formed ‘liberated Israel’. Although this view—called the peasants’
revolt or social revolution—was not directly supported by many scholars, it greatly
influenced research and, indirectly at least, altered the academic discourse.
In the late s and early s an even newer approach was developed (separately,
and with some differences) by the Israeli scholars Israel Finkelstein and Shlomo
Bunimovitz, who noted that when viewed in the long term the settlement process
of Iron Age I was only part of a larger cyclic process of settlement and abandonment
in the highlands. This approach, which resulted from the systematic study of the
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
 copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.