Saturday, June 11, 2016

Map 12

Map of the fault lines and the level of the Dead Sea in the Middle Bronze Age.
Also depicting the war of Chedorlaomer in Gen 14:1-12.
© 2014 Dr. David E. Graves, ECM
Map representing the fault lines and the level of the Dead Sea in the Middle Bronze Age (about 2000 BC). [1] This map also depicts the southern campaign (1) – (8) of Chedorlaomer, the king of Elam described in Genesis 14:1-12. Following his attack on Ḥaṣaṣon-Tamar (En-Gedi) (6) he encountered the confederation of the kings of the Cities of the Plain. Unfortunately the location of the Valley of Siddim is uncertain and bitumen deposits can be found in several locations (See Map 15 for the location of Sink holes). Chedorlaomer would have needed to have backtracked to encounter the Cities of the Plain in the south (7). Whereas traveling north (7) he would be traveling in the direction of Dan (8) where he was pursued by Abraham.[2]

[1] A. D. Riddle, and David Parker, “Interactive Dead Sea Map,” The Dead Sea: A History of Change, December 2013. http://www.riddlemaps.com/deadSea/map.swf.
[2] For more details on the location of Sodom and the narrative in Genesis 14:1-12 see David E. Graves, The Location of Sodom: Key Facts for Navigating the Maze of Arguments for the Location of the Cities of the Plain (Toronto, Ont.: Electronic Christian Media, 2016), 27-29.

© 2014 Dr. David E. Graves, Electronic Christian Media

Map 11

Proposed southern locations for the Cities of the Plain.
© 2014 Dr. David E. Graves, ECM
Proposed southern locations for the Cities of the Plain according to Dr. Bryant Wood.[1] The southern basin of the Dead Sea was once covered by water, but is now an artificial industrial pond filled with water from the northern basin and used to extract salts and minerals.

NUMERIA
Numeira and Bâb edh-Dhrâʿ were destroyed at different times, 250 years apart. FACT 39:  BAB EDH-DHRA AND NUMEIRA WERE DESTROYED AT DIFFERENT TIMES.[2] While the early conclusions of Rast and Schaub, that BeD and Numeira were both destroyed at approximately the same time (i.e., 2350–2067 BC), are often reported, it is now known that their individual destruction was separated by approximately two and a half centuries (250 years), with the destruction of BeD at ca. 2350 BC and Numeira at ca. 2600 BC. [3] If Bab edh-Dhrâ is Sodom then Numeira cannot be Gomorrah or one of the cities of the plain.

FEIFA AND KHIRBET KHANAZIR
Feifa and Khirbet Khanazir, proposed for the other Cities of the Plain, do not have Early Bronze 3 domestic occupation, as they were both only cemeteries in the EBA. At Khanazir, walls observed by Rast and Schaub in 1973 [4] were in reality rectangular structures marking Early Bronze IV shaft tombs. [5] See FACT 43: “Bab edh-Dhra and Numeira are the only inhabited towns in the southern Dead Sea Region in the EBA.” [6]

ES-SAFI
FACT 33: “There are Several Possible Locations for Zoar.” [7] No one knows for sure where biblical Zoar is located (see Map 10).  The beautiful Madaba mosaic map in the church in Madaba, Jordan, depicts the region of the Holy Land during the 6th cent. BC and has Byzantine Zoar marked on the Wadi Hesa near modern es-Safi (see map above), at the southern end of the Dead Sea.  However, no archaeological evidence has been uncovered to indicate that es-Safi is biblical Zoar. In fact there are no remains earlier than the Hellenistic Period.[8] Schuab, who excavated Bab edh-Dhra, states that the sixth century Zoar on the map is not the same as the Middle Bronze age Zoar as listed in Genesis.[9] Es Safi (Madaba map Zoar) is the Byzantine traditional site for Zoar with no archaeological evidence linking it with the Patriarchs.

It is believed that Tall el-Hammam is also identified on the Madaba map but the tesserae names are missing. [10]

DEIR 'AIN 'ABATA
FACT 34: LOT’S CAVE IS LOCATED ON THE MADABA MAP. [11] In 1983, Lot’s cave at Deir ‘Ain ‘Abata, near eṣ-Ṣafi, Jordan, was discovered by H. Donner and E. A. Knauf. Between 1988 and 1996, Greek archaeologist Konstantinos Politis and staff from the British Museum excavated the proposed venerated site of Lot’s cave. The site is identified on the Madaba Map above Zoora (Zoar). During the Byzantine period a Church was built over the cave and a monastery was established to venerate the location of Lot’s cave. [12]
The display text in the Museum of the Lowest Point on Earth at eṣ-Ṣafi, under the direction of Politis, states:
Three architectural fragments with Greek inscriptions alluding to Lot were also found on the site [of the church]. Literary and archaeological evidence suggests that it was a pilgrimage site, based around a natural cave that was believed to have been where Lot took refuge with his daughters after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 19). The excavations revealed an Early Byzantine monastery complex, with a church built over the cave. The church was adorned with six mosaic pavements, dated by inscriptions to 572-3, 605-7 and 692 respectively - the latest dating from after the Islamic conquest of the area.
The 7th cent. Byzantine church built in front of the cave had a mosaic with a dedication to “St Lot”. Politis also reports that:
Roman-period finds suggest an earlier veneration of the site. The additional discovery of substantial Early and Middle Bronze Age remains indicates that the cave was occupied during the period when, it is thought, the Genesis story occurred.[13]
While the cave did have Early Bronze [14] and Middle Bronze [15] pottery along with Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine, Umayyad, and ‘Abbasid,[16] there was no archaeological evidence which directly linked the cave to Lot. As there are many caves in the side of the mountains all along the Dead Sea (i.e., Qumran), and many people lived in the area during the EB and MB periods (i.e., the large cemeteries at BeD, Numeira, eṣ-Ṣafi, Feifeh, and Khanazir. See Fact 43), there was nothing special about this cave which connected it to Lot, other than Roman/Byzantine tradition that people used it during antiquity. The early Byzantine Christians often venerated sites to draw pilgrims  to their sites and thus the inscriptions placed on the floor of the church were commemorating this as a holy site in typical Byzantine tradition.

[1] Bryant G. Wood, “The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.” Bible and Spade 12, no. 3 (1999): 67–80.
[2] David E. Graves, The Location of Sodom: Key Facts for Navigating the Maze of Arguments for the Location of the Cities of the Plain (Toronto, Ont.: Electronic Christian Media, 2016), 113-115.
[3] See Jack Donahue, “Geologic Reconstruction of Numeira,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 255 (Summer 1984): 87; Michael David Coogan, “Numeira 1981,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 255 (Summer 1984): 81; 1. Meredith S. Chesson and R. Thomas Schaub, “Life in the Earliest Walled Towns on the Dead Sea Plain: Numayra and Bab Edh-Dhraʿ,” in Crossing Jordan: North American Contributions to the Archaeology of Jordan, ed. Thomas Evan Levy et al. (London, U.K.: Equinox, 2007), 247.
[4] Walter E.Rast, and R. Thomas Schaub. “Survey of the Southeastern Plain of the Dead Sea, 1973.” Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 19 (1974): 12–14.
[5] Walter E. Rast, “Bab Edh-Dhraʿ (ABD),” ed. David Noel Freedman et al., Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1996), 560; R. Thomas Schaub, “Southeast Dead Sea Plain,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, ed. Eric M. Meyers, vol. 5 (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1997), 62.
[6] Graves, The Location of Sodom, 121-24.
[7] ibid, 100-104.
[8] Steven Collins, “Rethinking the Location of Zoar: An Exercise in Biblical Geography,” Biblical Research Bulletin 4, no. 1 (2006): 1–5.
[9] Schaub, R. Thomas. “Southeast Dead Sea Plain.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, edited by Eric M. Meyers, 5:62–64. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1997.
[10] See David E. Graves and Scott Stripling, “Identification of Tall el-Hammam on the Madaba Map,” Bible and Spade 20, no. 2 (2007): 35–45.
[11] Graves, The Location of Sodom, 104-106.
[12] Konstantinos D. Politis, “Where Lot’s Daughters Seduced Their Father Excavations Reveal Commemorative Monastery,” Biblical Archaeology Review 30, no. 1 (2004): 20–31, 64; “The Monastery of Aghios Lot at Deir ‘Ain ‘Abata in Jordan”; Sanctuary of Lot at Deir ‘Ain ‘Abata in Jordan Excavations 1988–2003 (Amman: Jordan Distribution Agency, 2012.
[13]  Konstantinos D. Politis, “The Lost Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah,” in The Seventy Great Mysteries of the Ancient World: Unlocking the Secrets of Past Civilizations, ed. Brian M Fagan (New York: Thames & Hudson, 2001), 37.
[14] Politis, "Sanctuary of Lot at Deir ‘Ain ‘Abata in Jordan Excavations 1988–2003," 31–36.
[15] Ibid., 57–78; Michele Piccirillo, ed., “Ricerca Storico-Archeologica In Giordania 16  - 1996,” Liber annuus Studii biblici franciscani 46 (1996): 413–14.
[16] Politis, “Sanctuary of Lot at Deir ‘Ain ‘Abata in Jordan Excavations 1988–2003,” 108–114, 179–366.

 © 2014 Dr. David E. Graves, Electronic Christian Media.

Map 10

The proposed northern locations for the Cities of the Plain in the kikkār.
© 2014 Dr. David E. Graves, ECM.
The proposed northern locations for the Cities of the Plain. The kikkār is indicated by the circle in the centre. The altitude in the Jordan Valley is given in negative numbers. In the upper left hand corner, the several options for Bethel and Ai are indicated; though these do not affect the general location from where Lot looked East across the kikkār to see the city of Sodom. © 2014 Dr. David E. Graves, Electronic Christian Media

Tuesday, September 15, 2015

Bonus 56 - Nebuchadnezzar II’s Brick

Baked brick fragment referring to Nebuchadnezzar II, with part
of an inscription that states: "Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon,
provider for Esagila and Ezida, eldest son of Nabopolassar, king
of Babylon". Exhibit in the Oriental Institute Museum, University
of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA. Public Domain
Ancient kings often used inscribed baked bricks1  in their constructions that would include the name, titles and patronymic names of the King. One such ceramic brick bears the name of Nebuchadnezzar II in cuneiform and was excavated by Robert Koldeway from the south-east corner of the southern citadel (Kasr) in the city of Babylon in 1900–1901.2.  It is one of the earliest stamps of Nebuchadnezzar (604–561 BC), and is now on display in Room 6 of the Museum of the Ancient Near East, Pergamum Museum, Berlin (VA 3862).
Quotes from Antiquity

It is translated as:
"King of Babylon, fosterer of Esagilaand Ezida, son of Nabopolassar, King of Babylon."3.
Other inscribed bricks have been identified for several Babylonian rulers such as Nabopolassar, Sardanapalus, Esarhaddon (ME 90248), Sennacherib (ME 90210), Sargon II (Vat. cat. 15025)..and Cyrus (ME 118362) 4.  Similar bricks are on display in the British Museum (ME 90081) and the Oriental Institute Museum of the University of Chicago (OIM A2502).

Footnotes
1. Koldeway identified three kinds of stamps used to produce the bricks: terra cotta pottery, wood moulded in sand to produce a bronze cast and stone cut moulds. Robert Koldewey, The Excavations at Babylon, trans. Agnes S. Johns (New York, N.Y.: MacMillan & Co., 1914), 75–76.
2. Ibid., vi.
3. Ibid., 75.
4. Ibid., 79–80.

Wednesday, January 7, 2015

Bonus 54 - Bethlehem Bulla

Bethlehem bulla.
Photograph by Clara Amit,
courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority
In 2012 the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) announced the discovery of a 2,700 year old bulla (clay seal) found in the City of David excavation in Jerusalem, that contained the name of Bethlehem.1. 

The small (1.5 cm) bulla (seal impression) bears the inscription:
Bishv’at [in the seventh]
Bat Lechem [Bethlehem]
[Lemel]ekh [for the king] 2.  
This inscription is the earliest mention of the birthplace of Jesus of Nazareth. The Bulla seal was used to seal a document and identify the sender.3.

According to Eli Shukron, the director of the excavation on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority he reports:
it seems that in the seventh year of the reign of a king (it is unclear if the king referred to here is Hezekiah, Manasseh or Josiah), a shipment was dispatched from Bethlehem to the king in Jerusalem. The bulla we found belongs to the group of “fiscal” bullae – administrative bullae used to seal tax shipments remitted to the taxation system of the Kingdom of Judah in the late eighth and seventh centuries BCE. The tax could have been paid in the form of silver or agricultural produce such as wine or wheat”. Shukron emphasizes,” this is the first time the name Bethlehem appears outside the Bible, in an inscription from the First Temple period, which proves that Bethlehem was indeed a city in the Kingdom of Judah, and possibly also in earlier periods.4.  
Footnotes
For Further Study

Bonus 53 - Lachish Reliefs


Flaming arrows are fired at the city gate at Lachish during the siege
with the Jewish captives being led out of the conquered Judean.
Time is depicted as static as the captives would have been taken
away after the battle of Lachish.
Photo by David E. Graves. Trustees of the British Museum.

The only inscription which identifies the Lachish depicted in the reliefs reads:
“Sennacherib, the mighty king, king of the country of Assyria, sitting on the
throne of judgment, before (or at the entrance of) the city of Lachish (Lakhisha).
I give permission for its slaughter.” Austen H. Layard, Discoveries Among the
Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon
(New York: Harper & Sons, 1853), 128.
Photo by David E. Graves. Trustees of the British Museum.

Artist recreation of the siege of Lachish based
on the reliefs now displayed in the British Museum.
Photo by David E. Graves
Trustees of the British Museum.
The Lachish reliefs are a group of stone reliefs carved in the walls (12 m. wide and 5.10 m. long) of the Palace of Sennacherib (704-681 BC) that depict the Assyrian victory over the kingdom of  Judah in the siege of Lachish (701 BC) one of Judah’s major cities. The Palace of Sennacherib was discovered by Austen Henry Layard between 1845-1847 and is today displayed in the British Museum (Room 10b).1.   The Bible mentions the siege of Lachish and that Hezekiah offered to pay tribute to Sennacherib to prevent the siege of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 18:13-16).

Following the siege of Lachish, Jerusalem was to be next, however the prophet Isaiah stated:
Then Isaiah the son of Amoz sent to Hezekiah, saying, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Because you have prayed to me concerning Sennacherib king of Assyria, 22 this is the word that the Lord has spoken concerning him: …“Therefore thus says the Lord concerning the king of Assyria: He shall not come into this city or shoot an arrow there or come before it with a shield or cast up a siege mound against it. 34 By the way that he came, by the same he shall return, and he shall not come into this city, declares the Lord. 35 For I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake and for the sake of my servant David.” And the angel of the Lord went out and struck down 185,000 in the camp of the Assyrians. And when people arose early in the morning, behold, these were all dead bodies. 37 Then Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and returned home and lived at Nineveh. (Isa 37:21, 33-36).
Footnotes
  • 1. David Ussishkin, “The ‘Lachish Reliefs’ and the City of Lachish.” Israel Exploration Journal 30 (1980): 174-95.
For Further Study
  • Grabbe, Lester. Like a Bird in a Cage: The Invasion of Sennacherib in 701 BCE. Continuum International Publishing Group, 2003.
  • Graves, David E. Lachish Bibliography LINK
  • Paul, Evans. The Invasion of Sennacherib in the Book of Kings: A Source-Critical and Rhetorical Study of 2 Kings 18-19. IDC Publisher, 2009.
  • Israel, Finkelstein The Quest for the Historical Israel: Debating Archaeology and the History of Early Israel: Invited Lectures Delivered at the Sixth Biennial Colloquium. Society of Biblical literature, 2007.
  • Layard, Austen H. Discoveries Among the  Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon. New York: Harper & Sons, 1853.
  • Ussishkin, David. “The ‘Lachish Reliefs’ and the City of Lachish.” Israel Exploration Journal 30 (1980): 174-95.

Bonus 51 - Azekah Inscription

Azekah Inscription tablets (British Museum no. 81-3-13, 131) .
Photo from Hayim Tadmor “The Campaigns of Sargon II of Assur: A
Chronological-Historical Study (Conclusion)” Journal of Cuneiform
Studies
12, No. 3 (1958): 80. The Trustees of the British Museum.
Azekah Inscription tablets (British Museum K.6205 + BM 82-3-23,131).
Photo from Na’aman, Nadav. “Sennacherib’s ‘Letter to God’ on His
Campaign to Judah.”  Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
Research
214 (Apr., 1974): 27. Trustees of the British Museum.

Azekah Inscription tablets (K6205 + 81-3-13, 131, British Museum) are several Akkadian cuneiform tablets, discovered in 1903 by Henry Rawlinson in the Library of Ashurbanipal,1.  but identified as belonging to a single tablet by Nadav Na’aman in 1974. 2.  Initially scholars believed that the K 6205 tablet belonged to the military campaign of Tiglath-pileser III, 3. while the 81-3-13, 131 tablet 4. belonged to the military campaign of Sargon II. 5.  While Shea argues that the joined text now refers to the Sennacherib’s second campaign in 689 BC, 6.  most scholars still maintain the campaigns of Sargon II. 7.

The relevance for biblical studies is that the tablets reportedly mention the Assyrian attack by Sennacherib against Hezekiah, the king of Judah, and the conquest of Azekah (2 Kgs 18-19, 2 Chron 32). 8.
The inscription on the combined tablet has been translated as follows:
(3) […Ashur, my lord, encourage]ed me and against the land of Ju[dah I marched. In] the course of my campaign, the tribute of the ki[ng(s)... (4) […with the mig]ht of Ashur, my lord, the province of [Hezek]iah of Judah like […(5) […] the city of Azekah, his stronghold, which is between my [bo]rder and the land of Judah […(6) [like the nest of the eagle? ] located on a mountain ridge, like pointed iron daggers without number reaching high to heaven […(7) [Its walls] were strong and ricaled the highest mountains, to the (mere) sight, as if from the sky [appears its head? …(8) [by means of beaten (earth) ra]mps, mighty? Battering rams brought near, the work of […], with the attack by foot soldiers, [my] wa[rriors…(9) […] they had seen [the approach of my cav]alry and they had heard the roar of the mighty troops of the god Ashur and [their] he[arts] became afraid […(10) [The city Azekah I besieged,] I captured, I carried off its spoil, I destroyed, I devastated, [I burned with fire… 9.
Although not the final word on the subject, Becking points out:
The joined text forms a part of a “Letter to the deity” written by Sennacherib after his campaign against Juda [sic Judah] in 701 BCE. Therefore the Azriyau of the Annals of Tiglath Pileser III is nowadays interpreted as a rebel from the area of Hamath. As a result of this reconsideration of the sources a Judaean or Israelite interference in the coalition of 738 BCE is very unlikely. 10. 
 Footnotes

  • 1. Henry Rawlinson, The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, Bd. III: A Selection from the Miscellaneous Inscriptions of Assyria, Bowler, 1870.
  • 2. Nadav Na’aman, “Sennacherib’s ‘Letter to God’ on His Campaign to Judah.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 214 (Apr., 1974): 25-39
  • 3. P. Rost, Die Keilinschrifttexte Tiglat Pilesers III (Leipzig: Pfeiffer), 18-20; Hayim Tadmor, “The Campaigns of Sargon II of Assur.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 12, no. 3 (1958): 80-84.
  • 4. H. Winckler. Altorientalische Forschungen II, 570-574
  • 5. Nadav Na’aman, “Sennacherib’s ‘Letter to God’ on His Campaign to Judah.”  Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 214 (Apr., 1974): 26-28.
  • 6. William H. Shea, “Sennacherib’s Second Palestinian Campaign,” Journal of Biblical Literature 104, no. 3 (1985): 404-407.
  • 7. Hayim Tadmor, “The Campaigns of Sargon II of Assur: A Chronological-Historical Study (Conclusion),” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 12, no. 3 (1958): 80-84.
  • 8. See Shea for the debate over the details. Shea, “Sennacherib’s Second Palestinian Campaign,” 404-407.
  • 9. David Miano and Sarah Miano, eds., Milk and Honey: Essays on Ancient Israel and the Bible in Appreciation of the Judaic Studies Program at the University of California (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2007), 126; David Miano, Shadow on the Steps: Time Measurement in Ancient Israel, Resources for Biblical Study 64 (Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2010). 235; .
  • 10. Bob Becking, The Fall of Samaria: An Historical and Archaeological Study (Leiden: Brill, 1992), 3.
For Further Study
  • Becking, Bob. The Fall of Samaria: An Historical and Archaeological Study. Leiden: Brill, 1992.
  • Borger, Riekele. Babylonisch-Assyrische Lesestucke: Heft I: Elemente der Grammatik und der Schrift Ubungsbeispiele Glossar. II:Die Texte in Umschrift. III: Kommentar die Texte in Keilschrift. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1963.
  • Borger, Riekele. Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments. Edited by Otto Kaiser. Gütersloh, 1984  I, 4, 370.
  • Dalley, Stephanie. “Yahweh in Hamath in the 8th Century BC: Cuneiform Material and Historical Deductions.” Vetus Testamentum 40, no. 1 (1990): 21-32 
  • Miano, David, and Sarah Miano, eds. Milk and Honey: Essays on Ancient Israel and the Bible in Appreciation of the Judaic Studies Program at the University of California. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2007.
  • Miano, David. Shadow on the Steps: Time Measurement in Ancient Israel. Resources for Biblical Study 64. Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2010.
  • Na’aman, Nadav. “Sennacherib’s ‘Letter to God’ on His Campaign to Judah.”  Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 214 (Apr., 1974):  25-39.
  • Na’aman, Nadav. “Sennacherib’s Campaign to Judah and the Date of the lmlk Stamps.”  Vetus Testamentum 29, no. 1 (1979): 61-86.
  • Rawlinson, Henry. The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, Bd. III: A Selection from the Miscellaneous Inscriptions of Assyria, Bowler, 1870.
  • Shea, William H. “Sennacherib’s Second Palestinian Campaign.”  Journal of Biblical Literature 104, no. 3 (1985): 401-18. 
  • Tadmor, Hayim. “The Campaigns of Sargon II of Assur: A Chronological-Historical Study (Conclusion).” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 12, no. 3 (1958): 77-100. 22 f. 80-84.