Syro-Palestinian archaeology

Levantine archaeology is the archaeological study of the Levant. It is also known as Syro-Palestinian archaeology or Palestinian archaeology (particularly when the area of inquiry centers on ancient PalestineOn page 16 of his book, Rast notes that the term Palestine is commonly used by archaeologists in Jordan and Israel to refer to the region encompassed by modern-day Israel, Jordan and the West Bank. On page ix, he defines "ancient Palestine" the same way but also includes the Gaza Strip.). Besides its importance to the discipline of Biblical archaeology, the Levant is highly important when forming an understanding of the history of the earliest peoples of the Stone Age.

Current archaeological digs in Israel are carried out by the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA), and in the areas governed by the Palestinian Authority (PA), by its Ministry of Tourism and Antiquity, working under the auspices of the IAA. The Palestinian Authority prohibits unrestricted excavation at sites of archaeological importance. There are equivalent and similarly named authorities in Jordan and in Cyprus, a Directorate-General of Antiquities and Museums in Syria and a department of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism (Turkey).

Terminology and scope

Levantine archaeology encompasses excavations, salvage, conservation and reconstruction efforts, as well as off-site research, interpretation, and other scholarship. The geographical scope of Levantine archaeology includes the Hatay Province of Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, and Cyprus. The terminology for archaeology in the Levant has been defined in various, often competing or overlapping ways. Prior to and during the period of the British Mandate in Palestine (1920–1948), archaeology of the region was typically described as Palestinian archaeology or Biblical archaeology.

Under the influence of William F. Albright (1891–1971), biblical inquiry and narratives became increasingly important; indeed, Albright conceived of Palestinian archaeology or Levantine archaeology as a sub-field of biblical archaeology. "The archaeology of ancient Israel," is described by Franken and Franken-Battershill as, "but a small part of the far greater study of Palestinian archaeology." in ''A Primer of Old Testament Archaeology'' (1963). In a survey of North American dissertations, the overwhelming emphasis has been on the southern Levant. However it is only when considering the northern Levant alongside the southern that wider archaeological and historical questions can be addressed.

While both Classical archaeology and Levantine archaeology deal with the same general region of study, the focus and approach of these interrelated disciplines differs. Even scholars who have continued to advocate a role for Classical archaeology have accepted the existence of a general branch of Levantine archaeology. In addition, Classical archaeology may cover areas relevant to the Bible outside of the Levant (e.g., Egypt or Persia) and it takes into account the use and explanation of biblical texts, which Levantine archaeologist ignore. Beyond its importance to the discipline of classical archaeology, the region of the Levant is critical for an understanding of the history of the earliest peoples of the Stone Age

In academic, political, and public settings, the region's archaeology can also be described in terms of ancient or modern Israel, Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Cyprus, and the Hatay province of Turkey. Archaeologists may define the geographic range more narrowly, especially for inquiries that focus on 'Israel' or 'Palestine,' whether construed as ancient or modern territories. The shifting terminology over the past 50 years reflects political tensions that operate within and upon the field.

Levantine archaeology in the 21st century has relegated biblical concerns to a less dominant position, functioning as a "big tent" incorporating multiple archaeological practices. The Levant has displayed cultural continuity during most historical periods, leading to the increased study of the region as a whole.

Temporal scope

From prehistoric times through the Iron Age, chronological periods are usually named in keeping with technological developments that characterized that era. From the Babylonian era onward, naming is based on historical events. Scholars often disagree on the exact dates and terminology to be used for each period.

Some definitions for the temporal scope, particularly earlier on tended to exclude events after the Byzantine Period, but the temporal scope of Levantine archaeology has expanded over the years. In 1982, James A. Sauer wrote that the Islamic periods (630–1918 CE) were part of Levantine archaeological research, and that while some periods had been "ignored, neglected, or even discarded for the sake of other periods," it is now "an almost universally accepted principle that archaeological evidence from all periods must be treated with equal care."

Leslie J. Hoppe, writing in 1987, submits that Dever's definition of temporal scope of Levantine archaeology excludes the Early Arab period (640–1099), the Crusader period (1099–1291), the Mamluk period (1250–1517) and the Ottoman period (1517–1918). However, Dever's definition of the temporal scope of the field in ''What Did the Biblical Writers Know, and When Did They Know It?'' (2001), indicates that Hoppe's critique is no longer valid. There, Dever writes that the time-frame of Levantine archaeology, "extends far beyond the 'biblical period,' embracing everything from the Lower Paleolithic to the Ottoman period."

List of archaeological periods

The list below, from the Paleolithic Age to the Byzantine period, is drawn from the definitions provided by the ''Mercer Dictionary of the Bible''. For periods thereafter, the terminology and dates come from Sauer and Hoppe.

Prehistory is defined as the period preceding the advent of writing, which brought about the creation of written history. For the Levant the introduction of writing occurs at varying moments, but the Late Bronze Age is considered as the first period firmly outside prehistory. To avoid sub-regional conflicts, the prehistory as a category is left out of the list.
* Paleolithic (Old Stone) Age = 1,500,000–14,000 BCE
* Epipaleolithic (Mesolithic, Middle Stone) Age = 14,000–8,000 BCE
* Neolithic (New Stone) Age = 8,000–5,800 BCE
* Chalcolithic (Copper Stone) Age = 5,800–3,700 BCE
*Bronze Age
** Early Bronze (EB) Age = 3,700–2,500 BCE
** EB IV/Intermediate Bronze (IB) (formerly EB IV/MB I) = 2,500–2,000 BCE
** Middle Bronze (MB) Age = 2,200–1,550 BCE
*** MB I (formerly MB IIA) = 2,000–1,750 BCE
*** MB II(–III) (formerly MB IIB/C) = 1,750–1550 BCE
** Late Bronze (LB) Age = 1,550–1,200 BCE
*** LB I = 1,550–1,400 BCE
*** LB II = 1,400–1,200 BCE
* Iron Age = 1,200–586 BCE
** Iron I = 1,200–980 BCE
** Iron IIA = 980–830 BCE
** Iron IIB = 830–721 BCE
** Iron IIC = 721–586 BCE
* Babylonian period = 586–539 BCE
* Persian period = 539–332 BCE
* Hellenistic period = 332–63 BCE
** Early Hellenistic = 332–198 BCE
** Late Hellenistic = 198–63 BCE
* Roman period = 63 BCE – 324 CE
** Early Roman = 63 BCE – 135 CE
** Late Roman = 135–324 CE
* Byzantine period = 324–640 CE
* Islamic period = 630–1918 CE
** Early Arab period = 640–1099 CE
** Crusader period = 1099–1291 CE
** Mamluk period = 1250–1517 CE
** Ottoman period = 1517–1918 CE

History

Modern Levantine archaeology began in the late 19th century. Early expeditions lacked standardized methods for excavation and interpretation, and were often little more than treasure-hunting expeditions. A lack of awareness of the importance of stratigraphy in dating objects led to digging long trenches through the middle of a site that made work by later archaeologists more difficult.

Edward Robinson identified numerous sites from antiquity and published his findings with Eli Smith in a pivotal three-volume study entitled ''Biblical Researches in Palestine and the Adjacent Regions: Journal of Travels in the Year 1838''. In Syria, Ernest Renan carried out research in the 1860s and Howard Crosby Butler of Princeton University carried out surveys of Byzantine Christian sites (1904–1909).Dever, William G. "Syro-Palestinian and Biblical Archaeology", pp. 1244-1253. In the early 1900s, major projects were set up at Samaria, Gezer, Megiddo and Jericho.

An early school of modern Levantine archaeology was led by William F. Albright, whose work focused on biblical narratives. Albright himself held that Frederick Jones Bliss (1857–1939) was the father of Levantine archaeology, although Bliss is not well known in the field. Jeffrey A. Blakely attributes this to Bliss' successor at the Palestine Exploration Fund, R.A.S. Macalister (1870–1950), who underplayed his predecessor's achievements.

After the creation of independent Arab states in the region, national schools of archaeology were established in the 1960s. The research focuses and perspectives of these institutions differed from those of Western archaeological approaches, tending to eschew biblical studies and the search for theological roots in the Holy Land and concentrating more, though not exclusively on Islamic archaeology.

In doing so, Arab archaeologists added a "vigorous new element to Syro-Palestinian archaeology."

While the importance of stratigraphy, typology and balk grew in the mid-twentieth century, the continued tendency to ignore hard data in favour of subjective interpretations invited criticism. Paul W. Lapp, for example, whom many thought would take up the mantle of Albright before his premature death in 1970, wrote:

"Too much of Palestinian archaeology is an inflated fabrication ..Too often a subjective interpretation, not based on empirical stratigraphic observation, is used to demonstrate the validity of another subjective interpretation. We assign close dates to a group of pots on subjective typological grounds and go on to cite our opinion as independent evidence for similarly dating a parallel group. Too much of Palestinian archaeology's foundation building has involved chasing '' ad hominem'' arguments around in a circle."

In 1974, William Dever established the secular, non-biblical school of Syro-Palestinian archaeology and mounted a series of attacks on the very definition of biblical archaeology. Dever argued that the name of such inquiry should be changed to "archaeology of the Bible" or "archaeology of the Biblical period" to delineate the narrow temporal focus of Biblical archaeologists. Frank Moore Cross, who had studied under Albright and had taught Dever, emphasized that in Albright's view, biblical archaeology was not synonymous with Levantine archaeology, but rather that, "William Foxwell Albright regarded Palestinian archaeology or Levantine archaeology as a small, if important section of biblical archaeology. One finds it ironical that recent students suppose them interchangeable terms." Dever agreed that the terms were not interchangeable, but claimed that "'Syro-Palestinian archaeology' is not the same as the 'biblical archaeology'. I regret to say that all who would defend Albright and 'biblical archaeology' on this ground, are sadly out of touch with reality in the field of archaeology."

In recent decades, the term Levantine archaeology has generally replaced Syro-Palestinian archaeology. Electronic database results reveal an "overwhelming adoption" of the term ‘Levant’ when compared to ‘Syria-Palestine’ for archaeological studies. This is primarily due to the strong cultural and geographic continuity of the Levant, the northern sections of which were generally ignored in Syro-Palestinian archaeology. Towards the end of the twentieth century, Palestinian archaeology and/or Levantine archaeology became a more interdisciplinary practice. Specialists in archaeozoology, archaeobotany, geology, anthropology and epigraphy now work together to produce essential environmental and non-environmental data in multidisciplinary projects.

Foci in Levantine archaeology

Ceramics analysis

A central concern of Levantine archaeology since its genesis has been the study of ceramics. Whole pots and richly decorated pottery are uncommon in the Levant and the plainer, less ornate ceramic artifacts of the region have served the analytical goals of archaeologists, much more than those of museum collectors. The ubiquity of pottery sherds and their long history of use in the region makes ceramics analysis a particularly useful sub-discipline of Levantine archaeology, used to address issues of terminology and periodization.

Awareness of the value of pottery gained early recognition in a landmark survey conducted by Edward Robinson and Eli Smith,Philip and Baird, 2000, p. 31. whose findings were published in first two works on the subject: ''Biblical Researches in Palestine'' (1841) and ''Later Biblical Researches'' (1851).Millard, 1997, p. 23.

Ceramics analysis in Levantine archaeology has suffered from insularity and conservatism, due to the legacy of what J.P Dessel and Alexander H. Joffe call "the imperial hubris of pan-optic 'Biblical Archaeology.'" The dominance of biblical archaeological approaches meant that the sub-discipline was cut off from other branches of ancient Near Eastern studies, apart from occasional references to Northwest Semitic epigraphy and Assyriology,Philip and Baird, 2000, p. 36. as exemplified in the Mesha Stele, the Sefire Stelae, and the Tel Dan Stele.

As a result, widely varying principles, emphases, and definitions are used to determine local typologies among archaeologists working in the region. Attempts to identify and bridge the gaps made some headway at the Durham conference, though it was recognized that agreement on a single method of ceramic analysis or a single definition of a type may not be possible.

The solution proposed by Dessel and Joffe is for all archaeologists in the field to provide more explicit descriptions of the objects that they study. The more information provided and shared between those in related sub-disciplines, the more likely it is that they will be able to identify and understand the commonalities in the different typological systems.

Defining Phoenician

Levantine archaeology also includes the study of Phoenician culture, cosmopolitan in character and widespread in its distribution in the region. According to Benjamin Sass and Christoph Uehlinger, the questions of what is ''actually'' Phoenician and what is ''specifically'' Phoenician, in Phoenician iconography, constitute one well-known ''crux'' of Levantine archaeology. Without answers to these questions, the authors contend that research exploring the degree to which Phoenician art and symbolism penetrated into the different areas of Syria and Palestine will make little progress.

Practitioners

Israeli

Jewish interest in archaeology dates to the beginnings of the Zionist movement and the founding of the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society in 1914. Excavations at this early stage focused on sites related to the Bible and ancient Jewish history and included Philistine sites in Afula and Nahariya, as well as a second- to fourth-century village at Beth She'arim and a synagogue in Bet Alpha.Freedman, 2000, pp. 93-94. Early archaeological pioneers in 1920s and 1930s included Nahman Avigad, Michael Avi-Yonah, Ruth Amiran, Immanuel Ben-Dor, Avraham Biran, Benjamin Mazar, E.L. Sukenik, and Shmuel Yeivin.

By the 1950s, in contrast to the religious motivations of Biblical archaeologists, Israeli archaeology developed as a secular discipline motivated in part by the nationalistic desire to affirm the link between the modern, nascent Israeli nation-state and the ancient Jewish population of the land. Paleolithic archaeology was of little interest, nor was archaeology of Christian and Muslim periods.A History of Archaeological Thought, Bruce G. Trigger, Cambridge University Press, p.273-274 Yigael Yadin, the pioneer of the Israeli School of archaeology, excavated some of the most important sites in the region, including the Qumran Caves, Masada, Hazor and Tel Megiddo. Yadin's world view was that the identity of modern Israel was directly tied to the revolutionary past of the ancient Jewish population of the region. He therefore focused much of his work on excavating sites related to previous periods of Israelite nationalistic struggles: Hazor, which he associated with the conquest of Canaan by Joshua in c. 1250 BCE, and Masada, the site where Jewish rebels held out against the Romans in 72-73 CE.Barton, 2002, pp. 358-359. Masada was extensively excavated by a team led by Yadin from 1963 to 1965 and became a monument symbolizing the will of the new Israeli state to survive.

Today, Israeli universities have respected archaeology departments and institutes involved in research, excavation, conservation and training. Notable contemporary archaeologists include Eilat Mazar, Yoram Tsafrir, Ronny Reich, Ehud Netzer, Adam Zertal, Yohanan Aharoni, Eli Shukron, Gabriel Barkay, Israel Finkelstein, Yizhar Hirschfeld, and many more.

British and European

European archaeologists also continue to excavate and research in the region, with many of these projects centered in Arab countries, primary among them Jordan and Syria, and to a lesser extent in Lebanon. The most significant British excavations include the Tell Nebi Mend site ( Qadesh) in Syria and the Tell Iktanu and Tell es-Sa'adiyah sites in Jordan. Other notable European projects include Italian excavations at Tell Mardikh (Ebla) and Tell Meskene ( Emar) in Syria, French participation in Ras Shamra ( Ugarit) in Syria, French excavations at Tell Yarmut and German excavations at Tell Masos (both in modern-day Israel), and Dutch excavations Tell Deir 'Alla in Jordan.

Italian archaeologists were the first to undertake joint missions with Palestinian archaeologists in the West Bank, which were possible only after the signing of the Oslo Accords. The first joint project was conducted in Jericho and coordinated by Hamdan Taha, director of the Palestinian Antiquities Department and the University of Rome "La Sapienza", represented by Paolo Matthiae, the same archaeologist who discovered the site of Ebla in 1964. Unlike the joint missions between Americans and Jordanians, this project involved Italians and Palestinians digging at the same holes, side by side.

North American

Apart from Israeli archaeologists, Americans make up the largest group of archaeologists working in Israel.Barton, 2002, pp. 359-361. Joint American-Jordanian excavations have been conducted, but Nicolo Marchetti, an Italian archaeologist, says they do not constitute genuine collaboration: " ..you might find, at a site, one hole with Jordanians and 20 holes with Americans digging in them. After the work, usually it's the Americans who explain to the Jordanians what they've found."

Palestinian

The involvement of Palestinians as practitioners in the study of Palestinian archaeology is relatively recent. The ''Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land'' notes that, "The 1990s have seen the development of Palestinian archaeological activities, with a focus on tell archaeology on the one hand (H. Taha and M. Sadeq) and on the investigation of the indigenous landscape and cultural heritage on the other (K. Nashef and M. Abu Khalaf)."Negev and Gibson, 2001, p. 49.

The Palestinian Archaeology Institute at Bir Zeit University in Ramallah was established in 1987 with the help of Albert Glock, who headed the archaeology department at the university at the time. Glock's objective was to establish an archaeological program that would emphasize the Palestinian presence in Palestine, informed by his belief that, "Archaeology, as everything else, is politics, and my politics re thoseof the losers." Glock was killed in the West Bank by unidentified gunmen in 1992. The first archaeological site excavated by researchers from Bir Zeit University was undertaken in Tell Jenin in 1993.

Glock's views are echoed in the work of Khaled Nashef, a Palestinian archaeologist at Bir Zeit and editor of the university's ''Journal of Palestinian Archaeology'', who writes that for too long the history of Palestine has been written by Christian and Israeli "biblical archaeologists", and that Palestinians must themselves re-write that history, beginning with the archaeological recovery of ancient Palestine.Dever, 2003, p. 240. Such a perspective can also be seen in the practices of Hamdan Taha, the director of the Palestinian National Authority's Department of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage, responsible for overseeing preservation and excavation projects that involve both internationals and Palestinians.

Gerrit van der Kooij, an archaeologist at Leiden University in the Netherlands who works with Taha, says that, "It doesn't surprise me that outsiders become frustrated .. Tahasticks by his policy of equal partnership. That means Palestinians must be involved at every step," from planning and digging to publishing. In Van der Kooij's opinion, this policy is "fully justified and adds more social value to the project."

Dever submits that the recent insistence that Palestinian archaeology and history be written by "real Palestinians" stems from the influence of those he terms the " biblical revisionists", such as Keith W. Whitelam, Thomas L. Thompson, Phillip Davies and Niels Peter Lemche. Whitelam's book, ''The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History'' (1996) and Thompson's book, ''The Mythic Past: Biblical Archaeology and the Myth of Israel'' (1999) were both translated into Arabic shortly after their publication. Dever speculates that, "Nashef and many other Palestinian political activists have obviously read it." Harshly critical of both books, Dever accuses Whitelam's thesis that Israelis and "Jewish-inspired Christians" invented Israel, thus deliberately robbing Palestinians of their history, of being "extremely inflammatory" and "bordering on anti-Semitism", and Thompson's book of being "even more rabid."

Dever cites an editorial by Nashef published in the ''Journal of Palestinian Archaeology'' in July 2000 entitled, "The Debate on 'Ancient Israel': A Palestinian Perspective", that explicitly names the four "biblical revisionists" mentioned above, as evidence for his claim that their "rhetoric" has influenced Palestinian archaeologists. In the editorial itself, Nashef writes: "The fact of the matter is, the Palestinians have something completely different to offer in the debate on 'ancient Israel,' which seems to threaten the ideological basis of BAR (the American popular magazine, '' Biblical Archaeology Review'', which turned down this piece - WGD): they simply exist, and they have always existed on the soil of Palestine ..."

According to the Palestinian Authority's Ministry of Tourism and Antiquity, in the West Bank and Gaza Strip there are 12,000 archaeological and cultural heritage sites, 60,000 traditional houses, 1,750 major sites of human settlement, and 500 sites which have been excavated to date, 60 of which are major sites.

Archaeology in Israel

Excavation in Israel continues at a relatively rapid pace and is conducted according to generally high standards. Excavators return each year to a number of key sites that have been selected for their potential scientific and cultural interest. Current excavated sites of importance include Ashkelon, Hazor, Megiddo, Tel es-Safi, Dor, Hippos, Tel Kabri, Gamla and Rehov. Recent issues center on the veracity of such artifacts as the Jehoash Inscription and the James Ossuary, as well as the validity of whole chronological schemes. Amihai Mazar and Israel Finkelstein represent leading figures in the debate over the nature and chronology of the United Monarchy.

Archaeology in the West Bank

After the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, the West Bank was annexed by Jordan (1950), and archaeological excavations in the region were carried out by its Department of Antiquities, as had been the case throughout the British Mandate in Palestine. Made up of Muslim and Christian officials and headed by the British archaeologist Gerald Lankester Harding until 1956, field archaeology was conducted primarily by foreigners.Levy, 1998, p. 18.

Large-scale expeditions included those of the American Schools of Oriental Research at Tell Balata (1956–1964), the British School of Archaeology at Jericho (1952–1958), and the École Biblique at Tell el-Farah (1946–1960) and Khirbet Qumran (1951–1956). Rising nationalistic pressures led to Harding's dismissal in 1956 and thereafter, the Department of Antiquities was headed by Jordanian nationals.

After Israel occupied the area during the 1967 war, all antiquities in the area came under the control of the Archaeological Staff Officer,Levy, 1998, p. 19. who is the head of the Archaeology Department of the Civil Administration (ADCA). Though the Hague Convention prohibits the removal of cultural property from militarily occupied areas, both foreign and Israeli archaeologists mounted extensive excavations that have been criticized as overstepping the bounds of legitimate work to protect endangered sites. Vast amounts of new archaeological data have been uncovered in these explorations, although critics say that "relatively little effort was made to preserve or protect archaeological remains from the later Islamic and Ottoman periods, which were of direct relevance to the areas Muslim inhabitants." By 2007, the ADCA had been involved with over 6,000 archaeological sites in the West Bank including surveys and excavations, the vast majority of which had been kept from public and academic knowledge.

In the early 20th century, Palestinians focused on investigating Palestinian "material culture," as it relates to folklore and customs. In 1920, the Palestine Oriental Society was founded by, most prominently among them Tawfiq Canaan. The work of this society was more ethnographic and anthropological than archaeological. Interest in archaeological fieldwork increased as West Bank universities emerged in the 1980s and cultivated a new approach to Palestinian archaeology. A new generation of Palestinians, like Albert Glock, introduced innovations to the field by studying Islamic and Ottoman period ruins in village contexts.

Notable findings and sites

Belameh

Belameh, located a little over one mile (1.6 km) south of Jenin, is an important Bronze Age site identified with the ancient Ibleam, a Canaanite city mentioned in the Egyptian Royal Archive that was conquered by Thutmose III in the 15th century BCE.Negev and Gibson, 2001, p. 239. Ibleam is also mentioned in three passages of the Hebrew Bible

HOME


Content is Copyleft
Website design, code, and AI is Copyrighted (c) 2014-2017 by Stephen Payne


Consider donating to Wikimedia



As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases