,תל חצור A Partial History of Major Excavations and Burning Questions at

Transcription

1 :הארץ SURVEYING ,תל חצור A Partial History of Major Excavations and Burning Questions at Robert D. Heaton SPAR 308: Biblical Hazor (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Summer 2012) August 31, 2012 * This essay is to be submitted simultaneously to the Gustav Jeeninga Museum of Bible and Near Eastern Studies, (Anderson, Indiana), with gratitude for its fellowship program and support of my participation in the Hazor Excavations.

2 I. Introduction Situated among the rolling hills of Upper Galilee, Hazor is not associated with the major patriarchs of the Bible. Neither theophanies nor angelic appearances are associated with the site, and we similarly do not read of any fantastic miracles transpiring around its walls. No prophets hail from its locale. For Christians, though the tel is located well within the stomping ground of Jesus, within its vicinity can be found no church commemorating a Hazor-related visit by or narrative about the Nazarene. Hazor is not the home of synagogues, convents, monasteries, and it is not a favored destination for devout pilgrims of any particular religion. At the same time, per the biblical record, Hazor is uniquely connected to the foundational events of the Jewish people, the defensive fortification of its wisest king and the disappearance of the northern kingdom. From the Israelite conquest and apparent settlement of Canaan (Jo 11:10-14) to the Solomonic revival of Hazor s upper city (1 Kgs 9:15) and ultimate ruination at the hands of the invading Assyrian army (2 Kgs 15:29), a straightforward reading of the Bible denotes that the timeline of Hazor closely parallels the history of ancient Israel, from establishment to rise to fall. For this reason it is particularly shocking that the location of the tel was academically unknown before the publication of J. L. Porter s 1875 Handbook for Travellers in Syria and Palestine, and archaeologically untapped until the minor excavations of John Garstang, during the British Mandate period in Though we now know that the civilized habitation of Hazor dates back nearly four millennia, our scholarly, scientific understanding of the city stands as an exceptionally recent phenomenon. Lest it be perceived, however, that Hazor devoid as it is of any single defining religious quality, prophetic utterance, patriarchal significance or even any semblance of biblical Yahwistic orthodoxy lacks symbolism for persons of faith, any investigation into the scholarly ink spilled 19; Yigael Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery of a Great Citadel of the Bible (New York: Random House, 1975), 1

3 over the city will inevitably encounter the historical quandary surrounding the assertion that Joshua, successor to Moses as leader of the Israelites, conquered a once-flourishing Canaanite town. Hazor, known throughout the Bible chiefly as a place of violent conflict, has somewhat appropriately transformed into an academic battleground over the accuracy of texts, questions about the personage of Joshua, the chronological emergence of anything definitively Israelite, and indeed, the guiding theological narrative of the exodus itself. 2 Though this essay does not intend to weigh in on these questions in any definitive manner, it is worthwhile to trace this thread throughout the large-scale professional excavations at Hazor, which commenced in II. Excavations of the 1950s and 1960s Perhaps it is only fitting that Yigael Yadin, having himself served as head of military operations during the Israeli War of Independence, was the first archaeologist to undertake major excavations at Hazor and confront the essential questions of about its fiery demise. 3 Invited to present the Schweich Lectures of the British Academy in 1970, Yadin would later recall the massive scale of the four consecutive seasons from : each lasted approximately three months, from August to October, with the workforce at his disposal increasing from 120 in 1955 to 220 in For the decade to follow, Yadin s archaeological interests were turned to Megiddo and elsewhere, but he would eventually direct a fifth season at Hazor, from mid-july to the end of October One of the challenges of conducting the first major excavations at Hazor was the site s impressive size. Covering an area of about 225 acres and situated 15 kilometers north of the Sea 2 As evidence of this, one only needs to scan the titles of the first three bibliographic entries at the conclusion of this essay. Ben-Tor, for example, has been consumed with the who and when questions related to the fall of Hazor, while Haaretz appropriately captured it as a main point of intrigue between the assessments of Ben-Tor and Zuckerman. Yadin, too, was enthralled by these questions, to which he concluded that the narrative in the Book of Joshua is... the true historical nucleus. Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery, In fact, among the many attributes that interested Yadin in Hazor was his research about warfare in biblical lands in light of archaeology. Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery, Yigael Yadin, Hazor: With a Chapter on Israelite Megiddo (Schweich Lectures) (London: Oxford University Press, 1972), Ibid., 25. 2

4 of Galilee, Hazor s size is unprecedented among both archaeological sites in Israel and the whole southern Levant. 6 Furthermore, Hazor may be appropriately delineated as a tale of two cities, for the topographical features provide a quite striking separation between the tel proper, constituting the upper city and situated on the south side of the site, and the rolling hills of the much larger lower city, which fan out for some 200 acres to the north (eastern edge of the lower city) and the north-northwest (western edge of the lower city) on a large plateau. All told, these two cities comprise such a large archaeological area that Yadin estimated, following the 1968 season, that another 500 years of excavations would be necessary to uncover Hazor s secrets completely. 7 Yadin chose to spread his workforce among some eleven separate areas of interest in the seasons, including four areas on the tel and seven throughout the lower city. Of these, only Areas A and B, both of which were located on the tel, were excavated during all four seasons. 8 Area A was also excavated further during the 1968 season, one of six active sites during that year. 9 Space considerations force me to speak very broadly about the findings of these first five dig seasons. In the lower city, contrary to the premonitions of Garstang after 1928, Yadin s teams found a full-fledged city with huge, strong fortifications and all the trimmings such as public buildings, private dwellings and temples. 10 Yadin estimated that lower city may have been home to some 25,000 to 50,000 Canaanites at its height, but was only populated for five centuries before its destruction by fire, around 1230 BCE, by Joshua and the Israelites The measurement of 225 acres is derived from the addition of 25 acres (base of the upper city) and 200 acres (total measurement of the lower city). Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery, 21; 143. Alternatively, Maeir estimates the size of Middle Bronze Hazor at between 80 and 100 hectacres (i.e., acres). Aren M. Maeir, The Political and Economic Status of MB II Hazor and MB II Trade: An Inter- and Intra- Regional View, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 132 (January-June 2000): Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery, This estimate has been echoed by Ben-Tor, who furthermore calculates that just 2 percent of the lower city and 10 percent of the upper city had been excavated as of Yadin, Hazor (Schweich Lectures), Ibid., Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery, Ibid., ; 255. Save for the agents said to have destroyed Hazor, and less controversially, the date of its destruction, these conclusions are generally accepted today. 3

5 Sketching such limiting dates on the population of the lower city poses an important implication for the upper city. Beyond the entire destruction of the city in Joshua, the mentions of Hazor in the biblical record must pertain primarily to the tel proper, which must have a much larger range of habitation and settlement. And indeed, Israelite layers were found only a few strata below the surface of the upper city, the most significant and lasting feature of which was the Solomonic six-chamber gate. This gate, which is quantitatively and qualitatively similar to gates discovered at Megiddo and Gezer, stands as important evidence substantiating the biblical account of Solomon s fortifications in the tenth century BCE (1 Kgs 9:15). 12 During the 1968 season, two new areas of the tel were opened for excavation on the upper city. Yadin saw Area L, located to the west of Area A, as the likely location of Hazor s water system, and thus devoted half of his workforce to finding it. 13 His intuition proved correct, and similar to the extravagant water system he previously uncovered at Megiddo, the prevalent strata dated the water system to the period of Ahab. 14 Another new area in 1968 perhaps with more symbolic importance to the present author than the general population was located north of the Solomonic gate and christened as Area M. 15 This area was opened to check the assumption of Yadin and company that the casemate wall related to the Solomonic gate covered only the western half, or some 6.5 acres, of the upper city. That assumption was ultimately confirmed. 16 Furthermore, found in Area M was a solid wall that abutted the joint of the casemate wall, suggesting that the upper city was later expanded and fortified, likely under Ahab, to also include the eastern half. III. The Renewed Excavations, 1990 Present Though Yadin intended to return to Hazor following the 1968 season, other academic 12 Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery, Ibid., Ibid., Yadin, Hazor (Schweich Lectures), Ibid.,

6 and political interests would preclude him from doing so. 17 Up until his death in 1984, Yadin wished to find the large, theoretical cuneiform archive that must exist somewhere at Hazor, given that letters from the kings of Hazor in the Middle Bronze Age have been found in both Armana (Egypt) and Mari (Babylon). The same inclination that drove Yadin has served his successor at the Hebrew University, Amnon Ben-Tor, and Sharon Zuckerman to seek that same archive during the renewed excavations at Hazor, 18 which have taken place every season since 1990, albeit under a smaller (volunteer) scale than in the heyday of paid labor supported by the Israeli government. Though finding the archive as of yet concealed from the world, in 2012 is not the highest stated priority of recent years excavations, its existence remains cemented in everyone s minds at Hazor, from directors to professors to students and volunteers alike. Furthermore, one can argue that it has even driven us to dig in particular areas at the site. 19 Though the renewed excavations have more recently probed additional areas, even within the lower city, the two main dig sites since 1990 have been Areas A and M. 20 Within Area A, the major discovery of the renewed excavations has been the full extent of Building 7050, a large complex Ben-Tor initially identified as a Late Bronze Age palace based on its similarities to the palaces of Alalakh. 21 Evidence of vitrified mud-bricks suggests that Building 7050 was destroyed in the same conflagration that befell Canaanite Hazor in the Late Bronze Age. Area M has shifted slightly to the east since the 1968 season, and was expanded in attempt to understand the connection between the upper and lower cities during the centuries that both were populated. At the far northern edge of this new Area M, a highly unique cultic podium 17 Sharon Zuckerman, Where is the Hazor Archive Buried? Biblical Archaeology Review 32.2 (March/April 2006): As Zuckerman wrote in 2006, That an archive [at Hazor] does not exist is unacceptable. Ibid., It stands to reason (and is verified by finds elsewhere), for example, that such an archive of political and royal significance would be found in a royal palace or designated administrative building, which at Hazor should be confined to the upper city. 20 Amnon Ben-Tor, The Fall of Canaanite Hazor The Who and When Questions, in Mediterranean Peoples in Transition: Thirteenth to Early Tenth Centuries BCE, ed. Seymour Gitin, Amihay Mazar and Ephraim Stern (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1998), Ibid. 5

7 structure was found: Its walls are white-plastered and its floor is paved with basalt orthostats in secondary use. Four round depressions, arranged in a 50 x 50 cm square, were drilled into the top of the upper slab forming the surface of the podium. Several portable basalt vessels, as well as a horseshoe-shaped feature incorporated into the floor in front of the podium, are additional noteworthy features. 22 The podium may have featured a seated deity to whom visitors of the upper city perhaps foreign, perhaps residents of the lower city would have performed on festive occasions a minor sacrifice or ritual gesture before entry into the complex. 23 A secondary intention of this structure, however, was traffic control: visitors entering from the north were forced to turn right (west) up a small flight of stairs in order to enter the building and access the acropolis above. 24 Perhaps following the line of thinking that views Building 7050 as the Canaanite king s palace, the common assumption is that this podium complex leading toward Area M was necessarily public in nature. However, Zuckerman, possessing a certain academic distance from Building 7050, has questioned past off-the-cuff assumptions originating from Yadin, suggesting instead that the royal palatial structure is found within Area M. Thus, the podium can be identified as a royal portal, or an architecturally defined liminal area, carrying a clear message of a passage between opposing spheres: the lower city and the acropolis, the common people and the ruling elite, and possibly also the secular and the divine. 25 Building 7050, then, which carried only tenuous connections with Alalakh, is more likely to be a major royal cultic temple. To return briefly to the who and when questions surrounding the downfall of Canaanite Hazor, a similar divergence of professional opinion is visible among the directors of the renewed excavations. Ben-Tor, utilizing a process of elimination that includes only the Sea Peoples, Egyptians, a rival Canaanite city and the early Israelites, suggests that only the last of 22 Sharon Zuckerman, The City, Its Gods Will Return There... : Toward an Alternative Interpretation of Hazor s Acropolis in the Late Bronze Age, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 69.2 (October 2010): Ben-Tor and Rubiato, Zuckerman, The City, Its Gods, Ibid.,

8 these groups could have plausibly attacked and conquered Hazor. 26 Such a self-limitation of possible agents may hint at an overly inductive process of reasoning. Regardless, Ben-Tor seems willing to permit that this group could be proto-israelite and include other ethnic elements living in the region. 27 Zuckerman, on the other hand, suggests an internal revolution of class conflict in the vein of Occupy Wall Street, whereby the disgruntled citizens of Hazor s lower city could have rebelled and subjected its ruling elites to the fire, perhaps due to their incessant demands for manpower and agricultural resources. 28 This supposition does not seem implausible a priori, but it does raise further questions that become difficult to answer, such as how and why the lower city of Hazor seems to have met such an abrupt end, never to be settled again, around the same time that the tel s public structures were torched. IV. The 2012 Dig Season, Plus Final Remarks I participated in Session I of the 2012 dig season at Hazor, during which some 40 volunteers committed to three weeks of labor from June 24 to July 13, and was assigned for this entire period to a section within Area M that Shlomit Bechar referred to as the plaza. 29 This plaza, which was split into two sections by an artificial bulk wall, accommodated nine workers for the entire session. The area had previously been excavated during parts of the previous two seasons at Hazor, during which time it became obvious that the plaza had been meticulously filled, perhaps in the Late Bronze Age (per the latest remnants of pottery). The southern half of the plaza is flanked by massive stone walls nearly 2 meters in height; judging by the size of the stones and quality of the craftsmanship, this was absolutely no ordinary structure, and it likely belonged to royals or served as a public administrative building. On the tenth day of the dig, the 26 Amnon Ben-Tor and Maria Teresa Rubiato, Excavating Hazor: Did the Israelites Destroy the Canaanite City? Biblical Archaeology Review 25.3 (May/June 1999): Ibid., 39; cf. Ben-Tor, Sharon Zuckerman, Giving Voice to the Silent Majority of Ancient Generations, Biblical Archaeology Review 34.1 (January/February 2008): A day-by-day accounting of the season as I saw it, in addition to photographs and diagrams that delineate the location of this plaza, can be found in my Hazor Field Journal. 7

9 team excavating in the southern half of the plaza unearthed a pavement floor that eventually spilled over to my northern half, covering the entirety of the plaza. Furthermore, on the final day of the session, we found within the northern half of the plaza what appeared to us initially to be the top step of a stone stairway that may descend north, toward the basalt platform and podium structure found at Area M in the 1990s. Speaking more broadly about the season, the section immediately to our west produced the most significant finds, including an impressively preserved mud-brick wall as well as fallen mud-brick material, charred cedars and thirteen πίθοι (pithoi), or large storage vessels for foodstuffs. In addition, found within these πίθοι were individual grains of scorched wheat attesting to the very same destruction layer of Hazor as has previously been found in Building Since our pavement floor sits at the same level as the bases of these πίθοι, this finding is a good indication that our structure may have been actively utilized around the time of Hazor s destruction in the 13th century BCE. Importantly, as Ben-Tor suggested to Haaretz, carbon-14 dating of the scorched wheat grains could lead archaeologists to more precise estimates of the when question related to the destruction of Canaanite Hazor. 31 Additionally, an accurate assessment of the floor-level pottery, bones and other items found sitting on our pavement floor should also explain when the plaza was last used (and first filled). These data, combined with the fresco fragments and other minor finds, may be able to lend credence to the various theories about the exact nature of Area M, be it royal living-quarters or a more public structure. For the who question of Hazor s fiery demise, the 2012 season will not likely result in a tectonic shift of academic judgment. Indeed, though speculation may prove interesting, it is 30 Eli Ashkenazi, A 3,400-Year-Old Mystery: Who Burned the Palace of Canaanite Hatzor? Haaretz, (accessed August 26, 2012). 31 Ibid. 8

10 difficult to imagine the characteristics of such evidence, arising directly from the ancient soil of Hazor, that could convince a wide swath of skeptics (or conversely, adherents) of the Joshua narrative. We may just as easily posit that such evidence will be found elsewhere. In the meantime, we have trudged ever so slowly toward achieving Hazor s 500-year plan and toward the more pressing goals of making solid conclusions about the structures contained within Area M, discovering the temperament of any interplay between the upper and lower cities, and, of course, seeking the cuneiform library that must exist somewhere on the tel. Hopefully, our discoveries of the pavement floor, interestingly smooth stones leading to the north, and the πίθοι will make some lasting contribution toward these ends. As usual, however, archaeology generally leads to more debate-provoking questions than definitive answers, and the lasting value of our finds is not always realized in the field. Close scans of the πίθοι must be taken for any engravings or insignias that may lend credence to the theory that they represent royal food reserves. Meticulous measurements surveyed around the fallen mud-brick structure will allow for a reconstruction both of the building s architecture and a probable method of its demolition. Additionally, innumerable bins of pottery await close inspection for any overlooked items of significance. A fuller illustration of Hazor s former Bronze Age glory, during which it represented the head of all those kingdoms in Canaan (Jo 11:10 NRSV), exists out in the consciousness of future scholarship, and 2012 represents the steady march toward the realization of our competing theories, prevailing assumptions and burning questions. 9

11 Bibliography Ashkenazi, Eli. A 3,400-Year-Old Mystery: Who Burned the Palace of Canaanite Hatzor? Haaretz, July 23, (accessed August 26, 2012). Ben-Tor, Amnon. The Fall of Canaanite Hazor The Who and When Questions. In Mediterranean Peoples in Transition: Thirteenth to Early Tenth Centuries BCE, edited by Seymour Gitin, Amihay Mazar and Ephraim Stern, Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, Ben-Tor, Amnon, and Maria Teresa Rubiato. Excavating Hazor: Did the Israelites Destroy the Canaanite City? Biblical Archaeology Review 25.3 (May/June 1999): Maeir, Aren M. The Political and Economic Status of MB II Hazor and MB II Trade: An Interand Intra- Regional View. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 132 (January-June 2000): Yadin, Yigael. Hazor: The Rediscovery of a Great Citadel of the Bible. New York: Random House, Yadin, Yigael. Hazor: With a Chapter on Israelite Megiddo (Schweich Lectures). London: Oxford University Press, Zuckerman, Sharon. The City, Its Gods Will Return There... : Toward an Alternative Interpretation of Hazor s Acropolis in the Late Bronze Age. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 69.2 (October 2010): Zuckerman, Sharon. Giving Voice to the Silent Majority of Ancient Generations. Biblical Archaeology Review 34.1 (January/February 2008): 26; 82. Zuckerman, Sharon. Where is the Hazor Archive Buried? Biblical Archaeology Review 32.2 (March/April 2006):