Israel's Ethnogenesis: Settlement, Interaction, Expansion, And Resistance (Approaches to Anthropological Archaeology)

150 Pages·2008·10.6 MB·English

by  Avraham Faust

ISRAEL'S ETHNOGENESIS:
Settlement, Interaction, Expansion
and Resistance
Avraham Faust
Equinox Pu.blishing Ltd
8@,UlnOX
London Oakville
::1:U::11"""-P
m"01:l']1l'f
t1"DOil
Tomyparents
Yosef(Yosh) and Ya'el Faust
Publishedby
UK:EquinoxPublishingLtd.,Unit6,TheVillage, 101AmiesSt.,LondonSWII2JW
USA:DBBC,28MainStreet,Oakville,CT06779
www.equinoxpub.com
Firstpublished2006
©AvrahamFaust2006
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,
electronicormechanical,includingphotocopying,recordingoranyinformationstorageorretrievalsystem,
withoutpriorpermissioninwritingfromthepublishers.
LibraryofCongressCataloguing-in-PublicationData
AcataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheLibraryofCongress
ISBNI904768989
ISBN"9781904768982
TypesetbyForthcomingPublicationsLtd.
www.forthcomingpublications.com
PrintedandboundinGreatBritainbyAntonyRoweLtd,Chippenham,Wiltshire
CONTENTS
List ofFigures xi
Foreword xiii
Abbreviations xvi
PartI
INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION 3
Chapter2
ARCHAEOLOGYANDETHNICITY 11
Chapter3
ISRAELITE ETHNICITY: STATEOFRESEARCH 20
Part11
ANARCHAEOLOGICALEXAMINATION
OFISRAELITEETHNICITY
Chapter4
ISRAELITE MARKERSANDBEHAVIOR 33
Chapter5
MEATCONSUMPTION 35
Chapter6
DECORATEDPOTTERY 41
Chapter7
IMPORTED POTTERY 49
Chapter8
POTTERYFORMSANDREPERTOIRE 65
Chapter9
THEFOUR-RoOMHOUSE 71
Vlll Israel'sEthnogenesis Contents ix
Chapter 10 Chapter20
85
CIRCUMCISIONANDETHNICITY TRANSJORDAN REVISITED 221
Chapter 11 Chapter21
HIERARCHYANDEQUALITY: SUMMARYANDCONCLUSIONS 227
THEROOTSOFTHEISRAELITEEGALITARIANETHOS 92
Chapter22
POSTSCRIPT 235
Part III
ISRAEL'SIDENTITYANDTHEPHILISTINES
Bibliography 237
Chapter 12
Index ofAuthors 278
SETTLEMENTPATTERNS Index ofSubjects 285
INTHEIRONAGEI-IRONAGE11TRANSITION 111
Chapter 13
135
ETHNICITYANDSTATEHOOD INANCIENTISRAEL
Chapter 14
139
THEPHILISTINES INTHEIRONAGEI
Chapter 15
TOTEMISMTOETHNICITY:
THE PHILISTINES ANDISRAEL'SSELF-IDENTIFICATION 147
Part IV
MERENPTAH'SISRAEL:THEBEGINNINGS
Chapter 16
MERENPTAH'SISRAEL:
ISRAELINTHELATETHIRTEENTHCENTURYBCE 159
Chapter 17
ISRAEL'SEMERGENCE:THEBEGINNINGS 167
Chapter 18
170
ORIGINSRECONSIDERED
Part V
ASPECTS OFDISTRIBUTION
Chapter 19
POTS ANDPEOPLESREVISITED:
ISRAELITES, PHILISTINES ANDCANAANITES 191
LISTOF FIGURES
3.1. Plans ofSeveral IronI Villages intheHighlands 21
6.1. ExamplesofIron 11DecoratedPotteryfrom SelectedRegions 42
7.1. Distribution Map ofImportedPotteryintheLandofIsrael
intheIronAge11 53
8.1. TypicalPottery ofIron IHighland Villages 67
9.1. Four-Room Houses 72
9.2. DistributionMap ofFour-RoomHouses 76
9.3. Access Analysisofa TypicalFour-RoomHouse,
as Comparedtoa Typical Canaanite-PhoenicianHouse 79
12.1. A TableofIron I VillagesDestroyedorAbandoned
before theIron11 114-15
12.2. Occupation PeriodofSelectedRuralIronAge Sites 119
12.3. Schematic Map Showingthe TwoPhases
ofIronI Sites'Abandonment 125
14.1. SchematicMap ofPhilistiaintheIronAge I 140
19.1. Collared-Rim Jars 191
19.2. DistributionMap ofCollared-Rim Jars 192
19.3. IronAge IPhilistinePottery 207
19.4. Distribution Map ofPhilistineBichromePottery 208
19.5. BoundaryMaintenance intheIron Age I 212
19.6. TelQasileX 214
19.7. Megiddo VIA 216
FOREWORD
ManyarticlesandbookshavebeendevotedtoIsrael'semergenceinCanaan,
and have attempted to identify the earliest Israel in the archaeological
record. While theequationofthesettlers intheIronAge Ihighlandvillages
with theIsraelites seems tohavebeen quite straightforwardinthepast, this
identificationhas become one ofthe hottest debates in the archaeologyof
ancient Israel and even in biblical studies; views regarding the timing of
Israel'semergenceasanethnic group andtheprocesseswhich ledtoitand
accompanied it vary greatly. The present book attempts to trace Israelite
ethnic markers andethnicallyspecificbehaviors,andtoidentify thehistori
calcontextsinwhichtheybecamesuch;itconcludesthatIsrael'semergence
was along and complexprocess, which covers the entire Iron Age I (with
ethnic negotiations continuing even later).
While manyadvanceswere madeinrecentyears, thepresentmonograph
differs from most previous works by a combination ofseveral factors: Its
scope, it'sfocusonthe archaeologicalrecord, itspositionaspartofawider
study ofIronAge society, and, consequently, itsresearch questions.
Most recenttreatmentsofancientIsrael havebeencarriedoutinarticles.
Yet ethnicity is one of the most problematic topics in archaeology in
general, while the questionofethnogenesisiseven more obscure. Articles,
therefore, cannotadequatelydealwithsuchacomplexissue,andwillalways
leave much unanswered, particularly when dealing with such a difficult
case-study.Furthermore,eventhemajorityofthebookspublishedrecently
on the topic differ greatly from the present work-not only are many
textuallyoriented, butalmost allofthem dealwithIsraeliteethnicityaspart
ofan interestinIsrael's 'politicalhistory'. They focus on ethnicitymainly
because it became a major issue in determining questions such as the
historicityoftheBible,orofvarious narrativeswithin it.Ibelieveethnicity
cannot bestudiedinisolation fromotheraspects ofsociety, andthatsuchan
'isolationist' approach is part of the reason for the dead-end we have
presentlyreachedinthis area ofstudy.
This book is part of large-scale examination of Iron Age society of
ancientIsrael, and ethnicityisthereforeanalyzedwithin what Ibelieveisa
more appropriateframework. Moreover,the scope ofthebook andthe dis
cussion ofvariouselementsenablesustoexamineeachoftheinterpretations
xiv Israel'sEthnogenesis Foreword xv
suggestedtotheobservedpatternswithintheperiod'scontext(cf.Hodder's despite their problematic nature as historical sources, can give valuable
contextualarchaeology),thusstrengtheningitsprobability.Whilethewritten insights into the society that produced them. If used appropriately, the
sources servemainly asasecondfiddle,usually onlyatthesecond stageof existing data fromancient Israel canserveasanarchaeologicallaboratory.
theanalysis,theyalsoprovide acontextagainstwhichtoexaminethelikeli Theissueofethnogenesis is,toaverylargeextent,stillshroudedinmystery
hood oftheproposed explanations. intheanthropological literature,andIhopethatbyusingtherichandvaried
The written sources, and especially the Bible, are indeed invaluable databaseavailablefromancientIsrael,thepresentstudywillcontributetoan
sources that can give us insights into the society that produced them. The understanding oftheprocesses thatleadtothecreation ofethnicconscious
mereexistence ofthesetextsgivesthestudyofIsraeliteethnicity anadvan ness.Itwill,Ihope,exemplify thepotentialthelargedatabase fromancient
tageoverthestudyofotherethnicgroupsinantiquity. However, duetothe Israel hastocontribute toanthropologicalarchaeology.
fragmentary nature ofthetexts andtheir debated historicity, theytypically The first draft ofthis monograph was written during my post-doctorate
wereused hereasasecondary sourceonly,although inafewchaptersthey research atHarvardUniversity asaFulbright scholar in2002.Mywarmest
merited acentral role. Inmost cases, the discussion is decisively archaeo thanks toProfessor Larry Stager, ofthe DepartmentofNear Eastern Lan
logicalinorientation. Thatis,IronAgearchaeological datawasthoroughly guagesandCivilizations atHarvard,forinvitingmetoconducttheresearch
examined, and its social significance was studied. While only aspects at his department, and for his time and help. I would also like to thank
seemingly relevant for the study of ethnicity were discussed in this book, ProfessorOferBar-YosefoftheDepartmentofAnthropologyatHarvardfor
this procedure ensured that the research agenda was for the most part hisgreatassistance,withoutwhichIcouldnothavecompletedthewritingof
dictated by the archaeological evidence; the texts were incorporated only this book then. Many friends and colleagues have commented on earlier
within anarchaeologicallyestablishedresearch framework. Andthisholds drafts of the monograph or parts of it, or discussed some of the ideas
trueforeventhemore 'biblical' chapters,suchastheoneoncircumcision expressed inthebook. Iwould liketothank, firstandforemost, DrShlomo
thebiblical datawas incorporatedwithin a larger framework based on the Bunimovitz ofTel Aviv University and ProfessorAren Maeir ofBar Ilan
archaeological data. With this, I have reversed the traditional relationship University. ThanksarealsoduetoProfessors Elizabeth Bloch-Smith, Mark
between the two sources of information in most biblical archaeological Smith, David Schloen, Daniel Master, RyanByrne, Anson Rainey, Joshua
studies. Schwartz, Zeev Safrai, Eyal Regev, Aaron Demsky, Hanan Eshel and
Itshouldbe noted that suchisnotmeanttoundervalue thetexts-many ShimonCooper. Iwould alsoliketothanknumerous colleagues, including
discussions could not have proceeded without the insights gained by an ShlomoBunimovtiz,ZviLederman,ZviGalandYardenaAlexander,Karen
examination of them. But I believe that after over a hundred years of Covello-Paran, GabrielBarkay,Alonde-Groot, ZviGreenhut,DavidAmit,
archaeological research, it was worthwhile to reverse the usual scientific Amihai Mazar, Aren Maeir, andLily Singer-Avitz, who supplied mewith
procedure and give the archaeological evidence an opportunity to set the unpublished information. I would also like to thank Yulia Rudman for
agenda. This resulted in new questions and vistas in the study ofancient redrawing theplans and ShimonHai forredrawing the maps. Iwouldalso
Israel. like to thank Ben Gordon for meticulously editing the manuscript, and
It is my belief that the different approach of the book is one of its Duncan Bums forhiscareful copy-editing.
strengths, asisitsscope.Evenifsomeofthehistorical reconstructionsand I would also like to thank the Fulbright program for granting me the
interpretationspresentedwillnotbeacceptedbyallreaders, Ihopethatthe scholarship for my post-doctorate research, and to the Ingeborg Rennert
approach,atleast,willbeacceptedasappropriateandworthyofdeveloping. Center for Jerusalem Studies and the Koschitsky fund, both at the Martin
The same goes forthe scope ofthemonograph. While some ofthe discus (Szusz) department ofLand ofIsrael Studies and Archaeology, Bar-Ilan
sions might be speculative, and some ofthe arguments will surely not be University, fortheir Help.
accepted by all readers, the overall scenario presented here is not to be Mydeepestappreciationgoestomyfamily-mychildren,Kama,Marvah
undermined by a challenging of some of my interpretations, or by the
and Yannai, who had to 'give up' a father even when I was technically at
omission ofafewdebatable details.
home-andespeciallymywife,Iris,whotookonanunfairshareofthedaily
And finally, the database available from ancient Israel is unparalleled.
tasks athome while Iworked onthebook. Iamsograteful toallofthem.
Hundredsofplannedexcavationsandthousandsofsalvageexcavationshave
been carried out within a relatively limited geographic region, which has Avraham Faust
alsobeen extensively surveyed. This data isaccompanied by texts, which, Ramat-Gan, Israel, May 2005
1
ABBREVIAnONS PartI
INTRODUCTION
AA AmericanAntiquity
ABD DavidNoelFreedman(ed.),TheAnchorBibleDictionary(NewYork:
Doubleday, 1992)
ADAJ AnnualoftheDepartmentofAntiquitiesofJordan
AJA AmericanJournalofArchaeology
ARA AnnualReviewofAnthropology
ASOR AmericanSchoolsofOrientalResearch
AASOR AnnualoftheAmericanSchoolsofOrientalResearch
BA BiblicalArchaeologist
BAR BiblicalArchaeologyReview
BASOR BulletinoftheAmericanSchoolsofOrientalResearch
CA CurrentAnthropology
EB EncyclopaediaBiblica
El Eretz-Israel
ESI ExcavationsandSurveysinIsrael
IEJ IsraelExplorationJournal
JAA JournalofAnthropologicalArchaeology
JBL JournalofBiblicalLiterature
JESHO JournaloftheEconomicandSocialHistoryoftheOrient
JSOT JournalfortheStudy oftheOldTestament
JSOTSup Journal fortheStudyoftheOldTestamentSupplementSeries
JNES JournalofNearEasternStudies
NEA NearEasternArchaeology
NEAEHL E.Stem (ed.),New EncyclopediaofArchaeologicalExcavationsinthe
HolyLand(4vols.;Jerusalem: IsraelExplorationSociety)
OEANE E.M.Meyers (ed.), TheOxfordEncyclopediaofArchaeologyintheNear
East(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress)
OJA OxfordJournalofArchaeology
PEQ PalestineExplorationQuarterly
RE RevueBiblique
SHAJ StudiesintheHistoryandArchaeologyofJordan
SJOT ScandinavianJournaloftheOldTestament
TA TelAviv
UF UgaritForschungen
ZAW ZeitschrijifUrdieAlttestamentlischeWissenschaft
ZDPV ZeitschrijidesDeutschenPaldstina-Vereins
1
INTRODUCTION
The question ofIsrael's origins has been discussed intensively inbiblical
historical and archaeological research. Many studies have questioned the
foreign origin ofthe Israelites, or have been devoted, as ofrecent, to the
issue ofwhen the inhabitantsofthehighlandofancientIsrael began to see
themselvesasIsraelite. Muchhasalsobeenwritten onthepossible contribu
tion ofarchaeologicalresearchtothis discussion.
Until recently, it had been taken for granted in most studies that the
Israelites were in existence during the Iron Age I. The hundreds ofsites
identified in the central highlands ofancient Israel-mainly in the region
stretching from the southern Hebron hill countryto northern Samaria, but
alsointheGalilee-s-wereassumed tobeIsraelite, aswastheirmaterialcul
ture. For various reasons discussed below, this view is no longer widely
accepted, andtodayscholarsusecautionwhenreferring totheidentityofthe
settlers in the highlands during the Iron Age I. Consequently, one ofthe
most interesting and hotly debated issues today is identifying when the
Israelitescame into being asan ethnic group, and thus atwhich point, ifat
all, it isjustified to refer to sites as 'Israelite'. These questions are at the
heart ofthis study.'
Ethnicityandthe Study ofSociety
Asethnicityisbutoneaspectofsociallife,andprobablythemostillusiveof
them (see Renfrew 1993: 20), it cannot be studied separately from other
aspects ofsociety. Likewise, it should only be tackledafter such issues as
economicstructure,inequality,class,gender,socialorganization,cosmology,
andworldviewshavebeenadequatelydealtwith.Unfortunately,muchofthe
1. Notably, whilewewouldattempt to answer many ofthequestions surrounding
Israel'semergence inCanaan,itisnotouraimtodiscusstheorigin oftheIsraelites(in
the senseofdescent). Thisquestion, though interesting andimportant, isoflittlerele
vance tothe issueofIsrael's ethnogenesis, aswill be shownbelow. The issuewillbe
discussed brieflyinChapter 18.
4 Israel'sEthnogenesis 1.Introduction 5
studyofIsraeliteethnicityhasbeen conductedonlyasaby-productofstud
ArchaeologyandIsraelite Society: The WayForward
ies by scholars more focused on the reconstruction (or deconstruction) of
political, or biblical, history. Whereas they correctly understood that the A similarsituationexists regardingthe state ofresearchofthe archaeology
general history ofancient Israel is inseparable from the issue ofethnicity, ofsociety in ancient Israel, particularly ofthe Iron Age 11, which has not
many ofthese scholars did not pay attention to other aspects ofIsraelite received a great deal ofscholarly attention at all (e.g. Bunimovitz 2001).
society and thus did not have a good chance ofgaining a real insight into While Israelite society was discussed by many, in this area also the vast
Israelite ethnicity. majorityofscholars haveusedthewrittensources, mainlytheBible,astheir
The present study deals with ethnicityaspart ofa more comprehensive guide, with the archaeologicalfindsfunctioningusuallyonly asanillustra
look at Israelite society, ofwhich ethnicity is but one aspect (e.g. Faust tiontoatextuallyderivedanalysis (e.g. deVaux 1961;Reviv 1993).More
2005b). While this monograph is not intended to treat all aspects ofthe over, the relatively few studies that did pay close attention to the material
society-only those ofthe Israelite social and cognitive life that are of record had at their base an agenda derived from presupposed textually
importanceforthestudyofethnicitywillbediscussedindetail-theexami supportedknowledge.
nationiscarriedout within the framework ofalarger study ofthe Israelite Archaeology, however, iswell equippedto deal with ancientsociety, as
society, hence providingacontextagainstwhich toexaminetheinterpreta can be seen inmost archaeological studies inother parts ofthe world. The
tions suggested. present study proposes an approach to the study ofthe Iron Age society
where the archaeologicalrecord will, inmost cases, be examinedby itself.
This will result in anagenda uninfluencedby the writtensources.'
TheStudyofAncientIsrael: CurrentApproaches
There are several clearadvantages inusing the archaeologicalrecord in
All studies ofancientIsrael arebased to some extent on two types ofdata: placeofhistoricalsources astheprincipaldatabase(cf.McGuire 1982:161
historical,which ismainlybiblical, andarchaeological.Inanapproachtypi 62). The texts we have are extremelyproblematic on issues ofdating and
cal ofmost studies conducted until the 1970s, the biblical-historical data redaction, and therefore cannot be easily used. They also demonstrate, as
were given a prominentpositionwhile the archaeological finds were used with all written sources, extremepartiality andbias. Archaeologicalfinds,
mainlytosupplementahistoricallybasedreconstruction,or,inotherwords, however, inaddition toprovidingafresh look attheproblemsathand, can
to 'illustrate' the texts. Several archaeologists, most notably W.G. Dever, reflect the entire society with all its sub-groups; while these finds are also
have become frustrated by this approach to the archaeological record and partial inthe sense that they only representthe partofa society'smaterial
calledfor afull separation, even 'liberation', ofthe archaeological discus culturethat survived, they are much less biased.
sionfromthatofthetexts. Influencedbytheadvances ofNewArchaeology, Themainresearch questionsshouldbedelineatedbasedonanexhaustive
theyobjectedtothemethods andapproachesoftraditionalBiblical Archae examinationofpatternsinthematerialrecord.'The attempttofindanswers
ology, and calledfor the foundation ofasecular'Syro-PalestinianArchae tothesequestions shouldproceedusingallevidencepossible:archaeological
010gy'.2 During the 1970s and the 1980s these two distinct approaches findsshouldbescrutinizedforsimilarpatterns, andanthropologicalmethods
coexisted. should be used to explain them. Only then can the data provided by the
In the 1990s, however, Devermodified his approach. Realizingthat the
texts, asproblematicastheyare,stillgiveawealthofinformationregarding
variousaspects ofIsraelitelife,hecalled foranewapproachtothestudy of
3. Onecanclaimthattheinterestinethnicity,oranyother subjectforthatmatter, is
ancientIsrael,whichhetermed 'NewBiblicalArchaeology'(1993a).Unlike
biblicallydriven.WhileIdonotwishtogointoadetaileddiscussionofthisissue,suffice
theoldermethods ofBiblicalArchaeologythat 'preferred'thetextsoverthe
ittostatethattheproposedprocedurewillatleastensurethattheresearchquestionsthat
finds,hisnewapproachgives equalweight toboth typesofdata.Withsome
would composesuch astudy (i.e.the study ofethnicity) will bebasedonthearchaeo
modifications,thepresentwork aimsatdevelopingtheresearchofIsraelite
logicalfindsandderived from it,andnot dependantontexts.
ethnicityinthis spirit. 4. Everythingonthearchaeologicalrecordshouldbeexaminedaspartofageneral
study ofsociety: house size, internaldivision, changes inthis division, settlementpat
terns,potterydistribution,etc.While,asweshallseelater,ethnicityisnotthetotalityof
2. Althoughcallingforadialogue withbiblicalscholars. Foranoverview,seeDever traits,theexaminationmustbecomprehensiveindeterminingwhatshouldbeconnected
1985, 1993a. toethnicityandwhat shouldnot.