- The Israel and Golda Koschitzky
Department of Jewish History
Bar-Ilan University
Ramat Gan. 5290002
ISRAEL
Yigal Levin
Bar-Ilan University, Jewish History, Faculty Member
- Biblical Studies, Ancient Near East, Science Fiction, Aegean Archaeology, Hebrew Bible and Ancient Near East, Jewish History, and 126 moreHebrew Language, Ethnicity, Second Temple Judaism, Early Judaism (2nd Temple, Greco-Roman), Ancient Near East (Archaeology), Biblical Archaeology, Old Testament, Bible, Anthropology of Borders, Anthropology of Kinship, Comparative Semitic Linguistics, Mesopotamia History, Phoenicians, Ancient Mediterranean Religions, Archaeology of Ancient Israel, Archaeology and politics, Achaemenid Persia, Landscape archaeology (Anthropology), Chiefdoms (Archaeology), Amarna Letters, Bronze Age Interconnections (Egyptology), Religion and Identity (Anthropology), Jewish historiography, Second Temple Studies, Historical Development of Halakhah, Lingusitic Anthropology, Ancient Jewish History, Ramesses II, Land of Israel Studies, History, Achaemanid Empire, Archaeology of Colonialisms, Ezra-Nehemiah, Constructions of Identity in Ancient Near Eastern Texts, Achaemenid History, Ancient Religion, Nimrod, Sargon of Akkad, Hebrew Bible, Genesis 1-11, Philosophy Of Religion, Megiddo, Four room House, Bit Hilani, Jewish Studies, Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Law, Mesopotamian history, Israelite Religion, Samaritan Studies, Archaeology of Jordan, Jezreel, Samaria, Doctor Who, Shoshenq I, Jerusalem, Jerusalem Archaeology, History of Jerusalem, Late Biblical Hebrew, Alexander the Great, Babylonian Exile, Neo-Babylonian Law, Origins of Writing, Near Eastern Archaeology, History and Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, The Origin of the Hebrew god Yahweh and the adoption of monotheism., Political Geography and Geopolitics, Borders and Borderlands, Border Studies, Borders and Frontiers, Book of Judges, Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, Borders, Boundaries (Archaeology), Ethnic Boundaries, Benjamin, Historical Geography of the Biblical World, Achaemenid Empire, Achaemenid archaeology, Ancient Near Eastern History, Anthroponyms, Onomastic, Anthropology of Personal Names, Personal Names, Onomastics, Proper Names, Anthroponomastics, Onomastics, Personal Names, Pre-Judaic Semitic Monotheism, Ancient Near Eastern Languages, Amarna Studies, Deuteronomistic History, Book of Chronicles, Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah, Ancient Historiography, Hebrew Paleography, Ugaritic Studies, Northwest Semitics, Ancient Judaism, Ugaritic Literature, Kuntillet Ajrud, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Assyriology, Egyptology, Ancient History, Anthropology of Religion, Hebrew Bible and Northwest Semitic Languages, Ancient Greek Ethnicity, Semitic Onomastics, Fantasy Literature, Harry Potter, The Propehtic Literature, Assyrian Empire, Neo-Assyrian studies, Alphabetic Writing, Phoenician, Ancient Seals and Sealings, Hebrew and Judaic Studies, Ammonites, Priests and Levites, Ancient Israel, Biblical Hebrew (Languages And Linguistics), Near Eastern Studies, Semitic languages, Ancient Mesopotamian Religions, Mesopotamian Religions, Ancient Near Eastern Religions, Biblical History, Papyrus Amherst 63, and Canaanite Languagesedit
Proceedings of a conference held at Bar-Ilan University in 1994
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Festschrift for Aaron Demsky. File includes cover, introduction and TOC. To order go to Maarav.com.
Research Interests:
A Time of Change examines the changes that occurred in the Land of Israel during the Persian and early Hellenistic periods, from the sixth through the fourth centuries BCE. Taking into account the popularity of this field over the last... more
A Time of Change examines the changes that occurred in the Land of Israel during the Persian and early Hellenistic periods, from the sixth through the fourth centuries BCE. Taking into account the popularity of this field over the last forty years, A Time of Change is unique in presenting a fully up-to-date assessment of the area. A major focus of several of the papers is the examination of different aspects of the newly published 'Makkedah ostraca' and their meaning. By collecting this research in a single volume it is possible for the reader to obtain an overview of the situation during these periods in question, which in turn enables ready comparison with preceding and subsequent periods. For clarity, the studies are divided into three categories: archaeological, epigraphic and historical, though many of them operate on a more interdisciplinary level. This enables a thorough yet fresh and concise presentation of thought in this important area of study.
The Library of Second temple Studies (LStS) is a premier book series that offers cutting-edge work for a readership of scholars, teachers in the field of Second temple studies, postgraduate students and advanced undergraduates. All the many and diverse aspects of Second temple study are represented and promoted, including innovative work from historical perspectives, studies using social-scientific and literary theory, and developing theological, cultural and contextual approaches.
The Library of Second temple Studies (LStS) is a premier book series that offers cutting-edge work for a readership of scholars, teachers in the field of Second temple studies, postgraduate students and advanced undergraduates. All the many and diverse aspects of Second temple study are represented and promoted, including innovative work from historical perspectives, studies using social-scientific and literary theory, and developing theological, cultural and contextual approaches.
Research Interests:
The book of Chronicles, the last book of the Hebrew Bible and a central historical book of the Christian Old Testament, has in recent decades gone from being “the Cinderella of biblical studies” to being one of the most researched books... more
The book of Chronicles, the last book of the Hebrew Bible and a central historical book of the Christian Old Testament, has in recent decades gone from being “the Cinderella of biblical studies” to being one of the most researched books of the Bible. The anonymous author, often simply called “the Chronicler” by modern scholars, looks back at the old Israelite monarchy, before the Babylonian exile, from his vantage point in the post-exilic early Second Temple Period, and attempts to “update” the older historiographies of Samuel and Kings in order to elucidate their meaning to the people of his own time.
In The Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, Yigal Levin does the same for the modern reader. He offers a brand-new translation and commentary on 2 Chronicles chapters 10-36, tracing the “sacred history” of the monarchy from the division of Solomon's kingdom to the final exile and return. Each chapter is translated from the original Hebrew into an English that is both faithful to the original and easy for the modern reader to follow. Extensive footnotes provide full explanations of the translator's choices and of linguistic and literary issues, taking note of alternative versions offered by a wide array of ancient and modern versions and translations. The comprehensive commentary on each section provides historical background and explains the text both on a literary and a historical level, making full use of the most up-to-date research on the text, literature, history, geography and on the archaeological background of the biblical world.
The Chronicles of the Kings of Judah is to be followed by The Chronicles of David and Solomon on 1 Chronicles 10 – 2 Chronicles 9, and then by The Chronicles of All Israel on the genealogies of 1 Chronicles 1-9 and including comprehensive essays on the book of Chronicles, its time, purposes, methods and meanings. - See more at: http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/the-chronicles-of-the-kings-of-judah-9780567671714/#sthash.OLxdXhZG.dpuf
In The Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, Yigal Levin does the same for the modern reader. He offers a brand-new translation and commentary on 2 Chronicles chapters 10-36, tracing the “sacred history” of the monarchy from the division of Solomon's kingdom to the final exile and return. Each chapter is translated from the original Hebrew into an English that is both faithful to the original and easy for the modern reader to follow. Extensive footnotes provide full explanations of the translator's choices and of linguistic and literary issues, taking note of alternative versions offered by a wide array of ancient and modern versions and translations. The comprehensive commentary on each section provides historical background and explains the text both on a literary and a historical level, making full use of the most up-to-date research on the text, literature, history, geography and on the archaeological background of the biblical world.
The Chronicles of the Kings of Judah is to be followed by The Chronicles of David and Solomon on 1 Chronicles 10 – 2 Chronicles 9, and then by The Chronicles of All Israel on the genealogies of 1 Chronicles 1-9 and including comprehensive essays on the book of Chronicles, its time, purposes, methods and meanings. - See more at: http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/the-chronicles-of-the-kings-of-judah-9780567671714/#sthash.OLxdXhZG.dpuf
Research Interests: Ancient History, Archaeology of Ancient Israel, Biblical Studies, Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah, Biblical Archaeology, and 12 moreBiblical Interpretation, Literary Approaches to Biblical Studies, Israelite Religion, Ancient Israel, Book of Chronicles, Pre-Exilic Ancient Israel - Hebrew Bible and Archaeology; Phoenician-Punic language and epigraphy; Levantine Archaeology (espeically Biblical Archaeology), Biblical Hermeneutics, Chronicles, History of Ancient Israel, Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, ancient Israelite History and Historiograohy, and Bible Commentary
The Hebrew abstracts of all papers given at the conference, held at Bar-Ilan Univeristy on March 18, 2015
Research Interests:
The English language absracts of all papers given at the conference, held at Bar-Ilan University on March 18, 2015.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The transition between the reality of war and a hope for peace has accompanied the Jewish people since biblical times. However, the ways in which both concepts are understood have changed many times over the ages, and both have... more
The transition between the reality of war and a hope for peace has
accompanied the Jewish people since biblical times. However, the ways
in which both concepts are understood have changed many times over the
ages, and both have different implications for an independent nation
in its own land than they do for a community of exiles living as a
minority in foreign countries.
This book explores the concepts of war and peace throughout the
history of Judaism. Combining three branches of learning - classical Jewish sources, from the Bible to modern times; related academic disciplines of Jewish studies, humanities, social and political sciences; and public discussion of these issues on political, military, ideological and moral levels - contributors from Israel and the USA open new vistas of investigation for the future as well as an awareness of the past. Chapters touch on personal and collective morality in warfare, survival though a long and often violent history, and creation of some of the world’s great cultural assets, in literature, philosophy and religion, as well as in the fields of community life and social autonomy.
An important addition to the current literature on Jewish thought and philosophy, this book will be of considerable interest to scholars working in the areas of Jewish Studies, theology, modern politics, the Middle East and biblical studies.
accompanied the Jewish people since biblical times. However, the ways
in which both concepts are understood have changed many times over the
ages, and both have different implications for an independent nation
in its own land than they do for a community of exiles living as a
minority in foreign countries.
This book explores the concepts of war and peace throughout the
history of Judaism. Combining three branches of learning - classical Jewish sources, from the Bible to modern times; related academic disciplines of Jewish studies, humanities, social and political sciences; and public discussion of these issues on political, military, ideological and moral levels - contributors from Israel and the USA open new vistas of investigation for the future as well as an awareness of the past. Chapters touch on personal and collective morality in warfare, survival though a long and often violent history, and creation of some of the world’s great cultural assets, in literature, philosophy and religion, as well as in the fields of community life and social autonomy.
An important addition to the current literature on Jewish thought and philosophy, this book will be of considerable interest to scholars working in the areas of Jewish Studies, theology, modern politics, the Middle East and biblical studies.
Research Interests:
Dear Friends and Colleagues, On the morning of October 7, ca. 2000 HAMAS terrorists launched a brutal attack on civilians in Israeli kibbutzim, moshavim and towns adjacent to the Gaza Strip. They went from house to house to burn, torture,... more
Dear Friends and Colleagues, On the morning of October 7, ca. 2000 HAMAS terrorists launched a brutal attack on civilians in Israeli kibbutzim, moshavim and towns adjacent to the Gaza Strip. They went from house to house to burn, torture, mutilate, and kill Jewish families. They gunned down hundreds of young people at an outdoor music festival that turned into a scene of rape and massacre. Not only did they kill parents in front of children, raped women and children, murdered children and soldiers still asleep in their beds, but also beheaded babies that were sleeping in their cribs.
Research Interests:
Dear Friends and Colleagues, On the morning of October 7, ca. 2000 HAMAS terrorists launched a brutal attack on civilians in Israeli kibbutzim, moshavim and towns adjacent to the Gaza Strip. They went from house to house to burn, torture,... more
Dear Friends and Colleagues, On the morning of October 7, ca. 2000 HAMAS terrorists launched a brutal attack on civilians in Israeli kibbutzim, moshavim and towns adjacent to the Gaza Strip. They went from house to house to burn, torture, mutilate, and kill Jewish families. They gunned down hundreds of young people at an outdoor music festival that turned into a scene of rape and massacre. Not only did they kill parents in front of children, raped women and children, murdered children and soldiers still asleep in their beds, but also beheaded babies that were sleeping in their cribs.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The town of Kiriath-jearim, identified at Deir el-ꜤAzar above the village of Abu Ghosh, has come to scholarly attention recently due to the renewed excavations led by I. Finkelstein and T. Römer. Based on their preliminary finds and on... more
The town of Kiriath-jearim, identified at Deir el-ꜤAzar above the village of Abu Ghosh, has come to scholarly attention recently due to the renewed
excavations led by I. Finkelstein and T. Römer. Based on their preliminary finds and on their reading of the biblical texts, they have interpreted the Iron Age IIB–C fortified compound that they have begun to expose on the summit of the site as a northern Israelite fortified compound, ‘aimed at dominating the vassal kingdom of Judah’. This paper reexamines the position of Kiriath-jearim on the border between Judah and Benjamin according to both the biblical texts and the site’s geographical location, within the context of the ongoing discussions on the biblical tribal territories, that of Benjamin in particular, the ‘ark narrative’ and other texts that mention Kiriath-jearim, and challenges the excavators’ interpretation of the character and purpose of the site during the Iron Age II.
excavations led by I. Finkelstein and T. Römer. Based on their preliminary finds and on their reading of the biblical texts, they have interpreted the Iron Age IIB–C fortified compound that they have begun to expose on the summit of the site as a northern Israelite fortified compound, ‘aimed at dominating the vassal kingdom of Judah’. This paper reexamines the position of Kiriath-jearim on the border between Judah and Benjamin according to both the biblical texts and the site’s geographical location, within the context of the ongoing discussions on the biblical tribal territories, that of Benjamin in particular, the ‘ark narrative’ and other texts that mention Kiriath-jearim, and challenges the excavators’ interpretation of the character and purpose of the site during the Iron Age II.
Research Interests:
The town of Kiriath-jearim, identified at Deir el-ʿAzar above the village of Abu-Ghosh, has come to scholarly attention recently, due to the renewed excavations led by Israel Finkelstein and Thomas Römer. Based on their preliminary finds... more
The town of Kiriath-jearim, identified at Deir el-ʿAzar above the village of Abu-Ghosh, has come to scholarly attention recently, due to the renewed excavations led by Israel Finkelstein and Thomas Römer. Based on their preliminary finds and on their reading of the biblical texts, they have interpreted the Iron Age II B-C fortified compound that they have begun to expose on the summit of the site as a northern Israelite fortified compound, “aimed at dominating the vassal kingdom of Judah”. This paper reexamines the position of Kiriath-jearim on the border between Judah and Benjamin according to both the biblical texts and the site’s geographical location, within the context of the ongoing discussions
on the biblical tribal territories, that of Benjamin in particular, the “ark narrative” and other texts that mention Kiriath-jearim, and challenges the excavators’ interpretation of the character and purpose of the site during the Iron Age II.
on the biblical tribal territories, that of Benjamin in particular, the “ark narrative” and other texts that mention Kiriath-jearim, and challenges the excavators’ interpretation of the character and purpose of the site during the Iron Age II.
Research Interests:
This article examines the reign of Athaliah and her motives in light of ANE and biblical parallels.
Research Interests:
Tel Rosh (Khirbet Tell 'er-Ruwēsah) is located in the western part of the Upper Galilee, some 27 km northeast of Acre. Surveys conducted over the years and recent excavations have shown that it was settled almost continuously from the... more
Tel Rosh (Khirbet Tell 'er-Ruwēsah) is located in the western part of the Upper Galilee, some 27 km northeast of Acre. Surveys conducted over the years and recent excavations have shown that it was settled almost continuously from the Early Bronze Age to the Ottoman Period, and that it was a regional centre during Iron Age II. In the past, it was identified with Beth-Shemesh of Naphtali (Josh 19:38; Jdg 1:33). However, in our analysis, all of the towns of Naphtali should be sought east of Mount Meron, while those to its west were in the territory of Asher, and we tentatively propose to identify Tel Rosh with the 'northern' Rehob of Asher, listed in Josh 19:28.
Tis article examines the ways in which the Chronicler, in constructing his genealogies, utilized and combined the various genealogical forms that he had at his disposal in order to create his story. In doing so, it focuses especially on... more
Tis article examines the ways in which the Chronicler, in constructing his genealogies,
utilized and combined the various genealogical forms that he had at his
disposal in order to create his story. In doing so, it focuses especially on the
linear portions of the genealogies, those that serve to supply movement in time,
or chronological progression.
utilized and combined the various genealogical forms that he had at his
disposal in order to create his story. In doing so, it focuses especially on the
linear portions of the genealogies, those that serve to supply movement in time,
or chronological progression.
Research Interests:
For several hundred years, from the late Iron Age to the end of the 2nd century BCE, the southern neighbor of Judea was "Idumea", populated by descendants of Edomites, together with Qedarite and other Arabs and a mix of additional... more
For several hundred years, from the late Iron Age to the end of the 2nd century BCE, the southern neighbor of Judea was "Idumea", populated by descendants of Edomites, together with Qedarite and other Arabs and a mix of additional ethnicities. This paper examines the known data on the identity, especially religious identity, of these Idumeans, using a wide range of written sources and archaeological data. Within the Bible, "Edom" is presented as Israel's twin and its harshest enemy, but there are hints that the Edomites worshipped the God of Israel. While the origins of the "Edomite deity" Qaus remain obscure, as does the process of their migration into southern Judah, the many inscriptions from the Persian period show that Qaus became the most widely worshipped deity in the area, even if other gods, including Yahweh, were also recognized. The Hellenistic period brought heightened Greek and Phoenician influence, but also the stabilization of "Idumea" as an administrative/ethnic unit. Some of the practices of this period, such as male circumcision, show an affinity to the Judaism of the time. This paper also discusses the outcome of the Hasmonean conquest of Idumea and the incorporation of its inhabitants into the Jewish nation.
Research Interests:
The town if Moresheth-gath is mentioned by its full name only in Micah I: 14, at the end if a lamentation of the destruction if towns in the ]udean Shephelah. The town is further mentioned in Micah I: I and again in Jer. 26:18, and may be... more
The town if Moresheth-gath is mentioned by its full name only in Micah I: 14, at the end if a lamentation of the destruction if towns in the ]udean Shephelah. The town is further mentioned in Micah I: I and again
in Jer. 26:18, and may be the toponym meant by 'Gath' in 2 Chr. 11:8 and by 'Mareshah' in 2 Chr. 14:9.
The town if 'Mu'rasti' is mentioned in el-Amarna 335. The testimony of Eusebius and other ancient authorities has led many scholars to identify Moresheth-gath with the modern Tell el-]udeida or with other sites in the southern Shephelah. In all if the above-cited sources, however, the site is mentioned in connection with Gath, presumably the well-known Philistine city. The recently excavated site if Tel Harassim,
approximately five kilometres to the northwest if Tell es-Safi/Gath, would seem to be the best candidate to date for identification with Moresheth-gath.
in Jer. 26:18, and may be the toponym meant by 'Gath' in 2 Chr. 11:8 and by 'Mareshah' in 2 Chr. 14:9.
The town if 'Mu'rasti' is mentioned in el-Amarna 335. The testimony of Eusebius and other ancient authorities has led many scholars to identify Moresheth-gath with the modern Tell el-]udeida or with other sites in the southern Shephelah. In all if the above-cited sources, however, the site is mentioned in connection with Gath, presumably the well-known Philistine city. The recently excavated site if Tel Harassim,
approximately five kilometres to the northwest if Tell es-Safi/Gath, would seem to be the best candidate to date for identification with Moresheth-gath.
Research Interests:
This is the expanded Hebrew version of “‘From Goshen to Gibeon’ (Josh. 10:41): The Southern Frontier of the Early Monarchy”, Maarav 10 (2003), 195-220
Research Interests:
This paper examines the various appearances of “Aram” and “Arameans” in the book of Chronicles, in an attempt to understand what meaning this ethnonym had to the Chronicler and to his audience. These are compared to the many more... more
This paper examines the various appearances of “Aram” and “Arameans” in
the book of Chronicles, in an attempt to understand what meaning this ethnonym had to the Chronicler and to his audience. These are compared to the many more appearances in the Chronicler’s earlier biblical “sources.” This comparison is significant in our understanding of the Chronicler’s historiographical methods, as well as in better understanding the ongoing relationship between Jews and Arameans in the Second Temple Period. In the Chronicler’s Second Temple Period world, there was no such “nation” as “Aram,” but “Arameans,” that is speakers of Aramaic, were everywhere. “Aram” is first and foremost a major ethnic-linguistic component of the world. So the ancestor “Aram” was near the top of the genealogy of humanity. In the Chronicler’s world, Aram and Israel do not share a common legacy. But in the Chronicler’s picture of the past, there had been a kingdom of Aram, a fierce enemy of Israel. Geographically, this “Aram” was limited to the region of Damascus, the Chronicler’s contemporary “Darmascus.” To the Chronicler and to his late Persian-Period contemporaries, “Aram” was, in the past, a hostile kingdom beyond the borders of Israel, centered in “Darmascus,” and like all foreign kingdoms, a tool with which God could be able to punish Israel if he so wishes.
the book of Chronicles, in an attempt to understand what meaning this ethnonym had to the Chronicler and to his audience. These are compared to the many more appearances in the Chronicler’s earlier biblical “sources.” This comparison is significant in our understanding of the Chronicler’s historiographical methods, as well as in better understanding the ongoing relationship between Jews and Arameans in the Second Temple Period. In the Chronicler’s Second Temple Period world, there was no such “nation” as “Aram,” but “Arameans,” that is speakers of Aramaic, were everywhere. “Aram” is first and foremost a major ethnic-linguistic component of the world. So the ancestor “Aram” was near the top of the genealogy of humanity. In the Chronicler’s world, Aram and Israel do not share a common legacy. But in the Chronicler’s picture of the past, there had been a kingdom of Aram, a fierce enemy of Israel. Geographically, this “Aram” was limited to the region of Damascus, the Chronicler’s contemporary “Darmascus.” To the Chronicler and to his late Persian-Period contemporaries, “Aram” was, in the past, a hostile kingdom beyond the borders of Israel, centered in “Darmascus,” and like all foreign kingdoms, a tool with which God could be able to punish Israel if he so wishes.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This paper traces the development of three neighboring geo-ethnic units that existed in the southern Levant during and after the Persian Period: Judea, Samaria and Idumea. All three groups are the successors of Iron-Age states that were... more
This paper traces the development of three neighboring geo-ethnic units that existed in the southern Levant during and after the Persian Period: Judea, Samaria and Idumea. All three groups are the successors of Iron-Age states that were conquered and destroyed by the great Mesopotamian empires. All three groups underwent some form and measure of exile/displacement of population, of importation of foreign inhabitants, of destruction of urban centers and of rural settlements, of extreme social and economic changes, and of the disbandment of their former political structures. All three groups were reconstituted and re-formed during the Persian Period, and at least by the early Hellenistic Period were recognized as three specific ethne, each with its own autonomous self-governance within the Ptolemaic and then the Seleucid realms. There were, however, also significant differences between the three. Their specific histories, the time and manner in which the original Iron-Age states were terminated, imperial policy at the time, the fate of their inhabitants and of their land and many additional factors, all contributed to the formation of three very different groups, that emerged from the Persian Period into the Hellenistic world in different ways, and ultimately set out for very different destinies.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Upon arriving in Jerusalem sometime after 539 BCE, the returnees led by Zerubbabel were approached by a group of people to whom Ezra 4:1 refers as “the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin” who requested, “Let us build with you, for we... more
Upon arriving in Jerusalem sometime after 539 BCE, the returnees led by Zerubbabel were approached by a group of people to whom Ezra 4:1 refers as “the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin” who requested, “Let us build with you, for we worship your God as you do, and we have been sacrificing to him ever since the days of King Esarhaddon of Assyria who brought us here” (Ezra 4:2). The answer of the leaders of the returnees was negative. Most of the standard treatments of this passage deal with the following issues:
1. Who were these “adversaries”?
2. Were they or were they not identical with “the people of the land” who are mentioned in v. 4?
3. What were their motives in offering to participate in the construction of the Temple?
4. Was their offer genuine, or did they have ulterior motives?
5. Why did the returnees reject their offer out of hand?
One issue which, to the best of my knowledge, has not been dealt with is the question of the “adversaries’”
motives, not for offering to help, but for identifying themselves as foreign deportees in the first place. Why not claim to be genuine Israelites, who have always worshipped Yahweh, and are now happy to welcome their exiled brethren? So, assuming that they did wish Zerubbabel and his group to give them a role in the new temple, why emphasize their foreign origins? What were they thinking?
1. Who were these “adversaries”?
2. Were they or were they not identical with “the people of the land” who are mentioned in v. 4?
3. What were their motives in offering to participate in the construction of the Temple?
4. Was their offer genuine, or did they have ulterior motives?
5. Why did the returnees reject their offer out of hand?
One issue which, to the best of my knowledge, has not been dealt with is the question of the “adversaries’”
motives, not for offering to help, but for identifying themselves as foreign deportees in the first place. Why not claim to be genuine Israelites, who have always worshipped Yahweh, and are now happy to welcome their exiled brethren? So, assuming that they did wish Zerubbabel and his group to give them a role in the new temple, why emphasize their foreign origins? What were they thinking?
Research Interests:
This article examines the attitude seen in the Book of Chronicles towards mixed marriages between Israelites and gentiles in an attempt to understand the difference in this matter between the Chronicler and the author of Ezra-Nehemiah. Of... more
This article examines the attitude seen in the Book of Chronicles
towards mixed marriages between Israelites and gentiles in an attempt to understand the difference in this matter between the Chronicler and the author of Ezra-Nehemiah. Of the 14 cases of mixed marriages mentioned in Chronicles, 9 are discussed, some of which have parallels in other biblical books, and some of which are unique to Chronicles. Our conclusion is that in general the Chronicler did not consider such marriages to be problematic for the continued existence of the people of Israel or of the Yehud community in his own time. In this he represents an attitude that is very different than that reflected in Ezra-
Nehemiah.
towards mixed marriages between Israelites and gentiles in an attempt to understand the difference in this matter between the Chronicler and the author of Ezra-Nehemiah. Of the 14 cases of mixed marriages mentioned in Chronicles, 9 are discussed, some of which have parallels in other biblical books, and some of which are unique to Chronicles. Our conclusion is that in general the Chronicler did not consider such marriages to be problematic for the continued existence of the people of Israel or of the Yehud community in his own time. In this he represents an attitude that is very different than that reflected in Ezra-
Nehemiah.
Research Interests: Second Temple Judaism, Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah, Judaism, Early Judaism, Post-Exilic Judaism, and 5 moreHebrew Bible/Old Testament, Mixed Marriages, Recent developments in the history and archaeology of Judah during the Neo-Babylonian and early Persian Period, Community Identity Yehud, and History of Judaism In Antiquity
Tell it Not in Gath’ (Micah 1:10): What is Gath Doing in a List of the Destroyed Towns of Judah?”, in Itzhaq Shai, Jeffrey R. Chadwick, Louise Hitchcock, Amit Dagan, Chris McKinny and Joe Uziel (eds.), Tell it in Gath: Studies in the... more
Tell it Not in Gath’ (Micah 1:10): What is Gath Doing in a List of the Destroyed Towns of Judah?”, in Itzhaq Shai, Jeffrey R. Chadwick, Louise Hitchcock, Amit Dagan, Chris McKinny and Joe Uziel (eds.), Tell it in Gath: Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel: Essays in Honor of Aren M. Maeir on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday, Ägypten und Altes Testament 90, Münster: Zaphon, 2018, 445-495.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This article is an updated version of Yigal Levin, “Baal Worship in Early Israel: An Onomastic View in Light of the ‘Eshbaal’ Inscription from Khirbet Qeiyafa”, Maarav 21 (2014), pp. 203-222. It examines the element “Baal”, which appears... more
This article is an updated version of Yigal Levin, “Baal Worship in Early Israel: An Onomastic View in Light of the ‘Eshbaal’ Inscription from Khirbet Qeiyafa”, Maarav 21 (2014), pp. 203-222. It examines the element “Baal”, which appears in several names of Israelite leaders in the Bible, including members of the families of Kings Saul and David, all in the context of the pre-monarchic and early monarchic periods – roughly the 12th-10th centuries B.C.E. These names include Jerubaal (Gideon), Eshbaal son of Saul, Meribaal son of Jonathan, Beeljiada son of David and others. “Baal Shalishah”, “Baal-Hazor”, “Baal-Perazim” and “Baal Tamar” are names of places that are mentioned in Israelite contexts in roughly the same period. The appearance of this element would seem surprising, considering that throughout the Bible, “Baal” is the name of a Canaanite/Phoenician deity, whose worship is considered to be a cardinal sin against the covenant between Israel and its God. Indeed, within the books of the Deuteronomistic History (Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings) most of these names are either “explained away” or changed, Eshbaal and Meribaal becoming “Ish-bosheth” and “Mephi-bosheth”, Beeliada becoming “Eliada” (“God Knows”) and so on, but their “original” form was preserved in the book of Chronicles. Conversely, both the Bible and the epigraphic record show that from the 9th century B.C.E., the vast majority of Israelite and Judahite names were “Yahwistic”, names that include shortened forms of the name of the God of Israel, Yah, Yahu, Yeho, Yaw and so on, while Baal and other “foreign” deities are all but non-existent. The articles suggests that in the early days of Israelite identity, “Baal”, meaning “Lord”, was considered to be a legitimate title for the God of Israel, while in later periods, perhaps following the spread of Phoenician Baal cults in Israel, “Yahwist-purist” circles came to consider “Baal” as inappropriate for loyal Yahwists, and this element disappeared from Israelite and Judahite names. The writers or editors of the biblical Deuteronomistic History changed some of the names of early Israelites in their books accordingly. The later author of Chronicles, no longer concerned with this issue, retained the original names. The discovery of an inscription with the name “Eshbaal” at the early-monarchic site of Khirbet Qeiyafa shows that this name was indeed current at this time, and that it is indeed Chronicles that preserves the “original” form.
Research Interests:
In: Near Eastern Archaeology 80/4 (2017), 232-240, which is the first of two issues that focus on the Tell eṣ-Ṣâfi/Gath archaeological project, guest edited by Aren M. Maeir, project director.
Research Interests:
Collection of articles (first of two issues), edited by Aren Maeir, on the Tell es-Safi/Gath Archaeological Project. First issue covers introduction, general studies, and topical studies covering the Early Bronze through the Late Bronze... more
Collection of articles (first of two issues), edited by Aren Maeir, on the Tell es-Safi/Gath Archaeological Project. First issue covers introduction, general studies, and topical studies covering the Early Bronze through the Late Bronze Ages
Research Interests: History, Ancient History, Archaeology, Environmental Science, Anthropology, and 12 moreZooarchaeology, Bioarchaeology, Archaeobotany, Archaeology of Ancient Israel, Levantine Archaeology, Israel/Palestine, Ancient Religion, Biblical Archaeology, Ancient Near East, Aegean Archaeology, Early Bronze Age (Archaeology), and Bronze and Iron Ages in Eastern Mediterranean (Archaeology)
The River Jordan is mentioned by name about 165 times in the books of the Hebrew Bible, in narrative, in poetry, and, more than any other toponym, in geographical texts. At first glance, this does not seem surprising; the Jordan is by far... more
The River Jordan is mentioned by name about 165 times in the books of the Hebrew Bible, in narrative,
in poetry, and, more than any other toponym, in geographical texts. At first glance, this does not seem
surprising; the Jordan is by far the longest and most voluminous perennial steam in the land, flowing
naturally (that is, before calculating the loss of water in the modern period due to use by humans), at a rate
of about 1.3 billion cubic meters a year. However at second glance, the importance of the Jordan within the
Bible actually is surprising: because of its situation within the rift valley, and without modern abilities of
pumping and transporting water over long distances, the Jordan was actually only useful to a fairly small
number of people. Cities such as Hazor, Beth-shean, Rehob and Jericho, all situated near the Jordan but not
right on its banks, relied more on local streams and springs than on the river itself. Additionally, neither the
narrow and swift Jordan above the Kinneret nor the slow and meandering Jordan below the Kinneret were
ever all that useful as a means of transportation.
Despite all of this, the Jordan does have a unique position within certain biblical texts, as a symbolic
boundary of the Promised Land. This position is best known from those texts that describe the arrival of
the tribes of Israel at its banks: Moses is not allowed to cross, Israel’s crossing under Joshua is described in
miraculous terms, the two and a half tribes that remain on the eastern side are described as being ‘outside’
the land. This is further supported by certain geographic texts such as Num. 34:12, which picture the Jordan
as a boundary line.
On the other hand, there are also texts which picture the Jordan as an integral part of the land, with Israel
in fact settled on both sides. These texts are mostly concentrated in the Elijah and Elisha cycles, but not only
there. Other texts, such as the Psalms and prophetic books, use the Jordan allegorically.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of the Jordan within the reality of Iron Age Israel, and
to see how that role is reflected within the biblical texts, which present different and sometimes conflicting
images of the River Jordan.
in poetry, and, more than any other toponym, in geographical texts. At first glance, this does not seem
surprising; the Jordan is by far the longest and most voluminous perennial steam in the land, flowing
naturally (that is, before calculating the loss of water in the modern period due to use by humans), at a rate
of about 1.3 billion cubic meters a year. However at second glance, the importance of the Jordan within the
Bible actually is surprising: because of its situation within the rift valley, and without modern abilities of
pumping and transporting water over long distances, the Jordan was actually only useful to a fairly small
number of people. Cities such as Hazor, Beth-shean, Rehob and Jericho, all situated near the Jordan but not
right on its banks, relied more on local streams and springs than on the river itself. Additionally, neither the
narrow and swift Jordan above the Kinneret nor the slow and meandering Jordan below the Kinneret were
ever all that useful as a means of transportation.
Despite all of this, the Jordan does have a unique position within certain biblical texts, as a symbolic
boundary of the Promised Land. This position is best known from those texts that describe the arrival of
the tribes of Israel at its banks: Moses is not allowed to cross, Israel’s crossing under Joshua is described in
miraculous terms, the two and a half tribes that remain on the eastern side are described as being ‘outside’
the land. This is further supported by certain geographic texts such as Num. 34:12, which picture the Jordan
as a boundary line.
On the other hand, there are also texts which picture the Jordan as an integral part of the land, with Israel
in fact settled on both sides. These texts are mostly concentrated in the Elijah and Elisha cycles, but not only
there. Other texts, such as the Psalms and prophetic books, use the Jordan allegorically.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of the Jordan within the reality of Iron Age Israel, and
to see how that role is reflected within the biblical texts, which present different and sometimes conflicting
images of the River Jordan.
Research Interests:
in A. Berlejung, A.M. Maeir and A. Schüle (eds.), Wandering Arameans: Arameans Outside Syria - Textual and Archaeological Perspectives (Leipziger Altorientalische Studien 5), Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz, 39-52.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
pp. 203-222 in “And Inscribe the Name of Aaron”: Studies in Bible, Epigraphy, Literacy and History Presented to Aaron Demsky (ed. Yigal Levin and Ber Kotlerman); Rolling Hills Estates: Western Academic Press, 2017; Maarav 21 (2014).
Research Interests:
According to 1 Sam. 17:54, after dispatching Goliath, “And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem", which is obviously out of place in this context. This article surveys the various solutions that have been... more
According to 1 Sam. 17:54, after dispatching Goliath, “And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem", which is obviously out of place in this context. This article surveys the various solutions that have been proposed to this problem, and offers a new one.
The paper was published in The Books of Samuel: Stories - History - Reception History (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 284; ed. Walter Dietrich with Cynthia Edenburg and Phillippe Hugo), Leuven: Peeters, 2016, 371-383.
The paper was published in The Books of Samuel: Stories - History - Reception History (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 284; ed. Walter Dietrich with Cynthia Edenburg and Phillippe Hugo), Leuven: Peeters, 2016, 371-383.
Research Interests:
The article addresses the similarities between Asher genealogy (I Chronicles 7: 30-40) and the list of Saul's off-springs (I Samuel 14: 49) in order to suggest the possible historical context for the connection between the two lists.
Research Interests:
Y. Levin, “The Disappearance of the Biblical Period from the Study of Jewish History”, International Journal of Jewish Education Research 9 (2016), 29-61 (Hebrew with English Abstract). Abstract This article describes the dramatic... more
Y. Levin, “The Disappearance of the Biblical Period from the Study of Jewish History”, International Journal of Jewish Education Research 9 (2016), 29-61 (Hebrew with English Abstract).
Abstract
This article describes the dramatic decline in the study of the history of the biblical period in Israel over the past few decades, among the general public, in the educational system and in Israeli universities. This decline is partially connected to the radical regression in the status of the Bible among the Israeli public, from its former position as a foundational text of the Zionist movement to its present status as a barely-tolerated compulsory subject in the schools, but there are additional factors as well: social, cultural and political. The article describes the distancing of part of Israeli society from its former interest in the geography, history and archaeology of the Land of Israel and the abandonment of those parts of the land most identified with the Bible by certain sectors of society. In its description of the study of biblical-period history in the school system, the article points out that such study does not exist: there is no study of the history and cultures of the Ancient Near East. The study of the Bible itself, once a key subject in the secular-Zionist education system, has declined drastically and tends to focus on literary issues rather than on historical ones. Within the State-Religious education system, in which the Bible does have a central place, most study focuses on the traditional commentaries, and again shies away from historical issues. These trends are also true for the colleges of education that train teachers for both sectors: they do not teach the history of the Ancient Near East, and Bible studies focus on literary issues, and in the religious colleges on traditional commentaries. The main exceptions are the few colleges that offer “Land of Israel Studies”, which include the archaeology and history of that land in antiquity as well.
All of the “general” universities in Israel do offer programs in the history, languages and archaeology of the Ancient Near East, although the details differ from institution to institution. However here the academic problems of the use of the Bible as a historical source are a major source of discussion and dispute. The article surveys the development of the “minimalist” school and its consequences. Beyond this, all of these programs suffer from the same problems as do all the humanities and Judaic Studies in general, especially that of dwindling enrollment, which casts doubt on the programs’ viability in the future. The article ends by commenting on the danger posed by these trends to the future of Jewish identity in the State of Israel. An addendum to the article surveys the relevant academic programs in colleges and university, as of late 2011.
Abstract
This article describes the dramatic decline in the study of the history of the biblical period in Israel over the past few decades, among the general public, in the educational system and in Israeli universities. This decline is partially connected to the radical regression in the status of the Bible among the Israeli public, from its former position as a foundational text of the Zionist movement to its present status as a barely-tolerated compulsory subject in the schools, but there are additional factors as well: social, cultural and political. The article describes the distancing of part of Israeli society from its former interest in the geography, history and archaeology of the Land of Israel and the abandonment of those parts of the land most identified with the Bible by certain sectors of society. In its description of the study of biblical-period history in the school system, the article points out that such study does not exist: there is no study of the history and cultures of the Ancient Near East. The study of the Bible itself, once a key subject in the secular-Zionist education system, has declined drastically and tends to focus on literary issues rather than on historical ones. Within the State-Religious education system, in which the Bible does have a central place, most study focuses on the traditional commentaries, and again shies away from historical issues. These trends are also true for the colleges of education that train teachers for both sectors: they do not teach the history of the Ancient Near East, and Bible studies focus on literary issues, and in the religious colleges on traditional commentaries. The main exceptions are the few colleges that offer “Land of Israel Studies”, which include the archaeology and history of that land in antiquity as well.
All of the “general” universities in Israel do offer programs in the history, languages and archaeology of the Ancient Near East, although the details differ from institution to institution. However here the academic problems of the use of the Bible as a historical source are a major source of discussion and dispute. The article surveys the development of the “minimalist” school and its consequences. Beyond this, all of these programs suffer from the same problems as do all the humanities and Judaic Studies in general, especially that of dwindling enrollment, which casts doubt on the programs’ viability in the future. The article ends by commenting on the danger posed by these trends to the future of Jewish identity in the State of Israel. An addendum to the article surveys the relevant academic programs in colleges and university, as of late 2011.
Research Interests:
Y. Levin, “The Formation of Idumean Identity”, ARAM 27 (2015), 187-202.
Research Interests:
Yigal Levin, "Understanding Biblical Genealogies", Currents in Research: Biblical Studies 9 (2001), pp. 11-46
Research Interests: Genealogy, Hebrew Bible, Biblical Studies, Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah, Ancient Near East, and 7 moreLiterary Approaches to Biblical Studies, Hebrew Bible and Ancient Near East, Book of Chronicles, Pre-Exilic Ancient Israel - Hebrew Bible and Archaeology; Phoenician-Punic language and epigraphy; Levantine Archaeology (espeically Biblical Archaeology), Historical Geography of the Biblical World, History of Ancient Israel, and Hebrew Bible/Old Testament
Research Interests: Assyriology, Hebrew Bible, Biblical Studies, Ancient Near East, Bible, and 13 moreAssyria, Hebrew Bible and Ancient Near East, Biblical Hebrew (Languages And Linguistics), Neo-Assyrian studies, Jerusalem, Ancient Israel, History of Jerusalem, Sennacherib's third campaign, Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, Hezekiah, Hezekiah, King of Judah, Lachish; Siege of Lachish; Sennacherib campaign to Judah; Sennacherib; Biblical Archaeology; Near Eastern Archaeology; Siege-ramp; Siege-machine; Assyrian reliefs, and Rabshakeh
In Daniel M. Master (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Bible and Archaeology vol. I, Oxford – New York: Oxford University Press, 2013, 139-146.
Research Interests:
in Daniel M. Master (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Bible and Archaeology vol. II, Oxford – New York: Oxford University Press, 2013, 42-46.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The Identification, Function and Context of Khirbet Qeiyafa: Archaeology, Historical-Geography and Historiography Yigal Levin Abstract Khirbet Qeiyafa is a small archaeological site situated on the top of a hill overlooking the... more
The Identification, Function and Context of Khirbet Qeiyafa:
Archaeology, Historical-Geography and Historiography
Yigal Levin
Abstract
Khirbet Qeiyafa is a small archaeological site situated on the top of a hill overlooking the Elah Valley from the north, across from Tell Socoh and about 2 km east of Azekah. The site was excavated by Prof. Yosef Garfinkel and Saar Ganor during the years 2007-2013. The site was fortified for a short while during the transition from Iron Age I to Iron Age IIa, about 1000 BCE – the beginning of the Israelite monarchy. The site was surrounded by a 700 meter-long casemate wall that formed a rough circle. It had two gates. Among the finds were large amounts of pottery, weapons, cultic implements and an ostracon in Proto-Canaanite script.
During the excavation, the excavators came to view the site as “a fortified Judahite city from the time of King David”, and to see their results as disproving “biblical minimalism” and “low chronology”. They identified the site with “Shaaraim”, mentioned in the Judahite town list in Josh. 15 and in the battle between David and Goliath in 1 Sam. 17, and supposedly in the Simeonite town list in 1 Chr. 4 as well.
This article disproves the identification of the site as “Shaaraim” and suggests identifying it with “the Ma’agal” (“the circle”) that is mentioned as Saul’s camp in 1 Sam. 17:20. The article also examines the rest of the excavators’ claims and shows that there is no way to prove that the inhabitants of the site were “Israelite”. In the writers opinion, the site may have been “Canaanite”, taken over by Saul, destroyed by either the Philistines or even David, and then worked into the biblical story by an author who was very familiar with the area of the Elah Valley.
Archaeology, Historical-Geography and Historiography
Yigal Levin
Abstract
Khirbet Qeiyafa is a small archaeological site situated on the top of a hill overlooking the Elah Valley from the north, across from Tell Socoh and about 2 km east of Azekah. The site was excavated by Prof. Yosef Garfinkel and Saar Ganor during the years 2007-2013. The site was fortified for a short while during the transition from Iron Age I to Iron Age IIa, about 1000 BCE – the beginning of the Israelite monarchy. The site was surrounded by a 700 meter-long casemate wall that formed a rough circle. It had two gates. Among the finds were large amounts of pottery, weapons, cultic implements and an ostracon in Proto-Canaanite script.
During the excavation, the excavators came to view the site as “a fortified Judahite city from the time of King David”, and to see their results as disproving “biblical minimalism” and “low chronology”. They identified the site with “Shaaraim”, mentioned in the Judahite town list in Josh. 15 and in the battle between David and Goliath in 1 Sam. 17, and supposedly in the Simeonite town list in 1 Chr. 4 as well.
This article disproves the identification of the site as “Shaaraim” and suggests identifying it with “the Ma’agal” (“the circle”) that is mentioned as Saul’s camp in 1 Sam. 17:20. The article also examines the rest of the excavators’ claims and shows that there is no way to prove that the inhabitants of the site were “Israelite”. In the writers opinion, the site may have been “Canaanite”, taken over by Saul, destroyed by either the Philistines or even David, and then worked into the biblical story by an author who was very familiar with the area of the Elah Valley.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Khirbet Qeiyafa is a small, fortified, early Iron Age site in the Judaean Shephelah, situated on a low hill overlooking the Elah Valley, at approximately the place described in 1 Samuel 17 as the site of the duel between David and... more
Khirbet Qeiyafa is a small, fortified, early Iron Age site in the Judaean Shephelah, situated on a low hill overlooking the Elah Valley, at approximately the place described in 1 Samuel 17 as the site of the duel between David and Goliath. The main phase of occupation seems to have extended for only a short time during the Iron I/Iron IIA transition.
Various scholars have suggested different identifications, most notably Shaaraim and Netaim. This paper refutes previous suggestions while proposing that this site be identified with the maʿgāl, Saul’s fortified camp at which David leaves his pack in 1 Sam 17:20, and reaffirming that the real value of the site is not its biblical identity but its position, on both the geographic frontier between Iron Age Judah and Philistia and the
chronological transition from Iron Age I to Iron Age IIA.
Various scholars have suggested different identifications, most notably Shaaraim and Netaim. This paper refutes previous suggestions while proposing that this site be identified with the maʿgāl, Saul’s fortified camp at which David leaves his pack in 1 Sam 17:20, and reaffirming that the real value of the site is not its biblical identity but its position, on both the geographic frontier between Iron Age Judah and Philistia and the
chronological transition from Iron Age I to Iron Age IIA.
Research Interests:
Within the general context of the so-called “Primeval History” of the world that makes up the first eleven chapters of Genesis, “the toledoth of the sons of Noah” recorded in chapter 10 is unique. After the grand universal scope of the... more
Within the general context of the so-called “Primeval History” of the
world that makes up the first eleven chapters of Genesis, “the
toledoth of the sons of Noah” recorded in chapter 10 is unique. After the grand universal scope of the first creation narrative (Gen 1:1–2:3) and the
more “down-to-earth” second creation and Eden story (2:4–3:24),
after the tale of social origins in chapter 4, the linear genealogy of chapter
5, and the elaborate and complex flood narrative of chapters 6–9
comes the no-less complex and elaborate genealogy of the descendants
of Noah, often dubbed “The Table of the Nations.” This “table” presents
all the peoples of the earth as an extended family group, a collection
of mishpahot. The purpose of this paper, respectfully presented
to my teacher Professor Aaron Skaist, is to offer some insight as to the
background, genre, and purpose of this chapter within the preliminary
chapters of the book of Genesis.
world that makes up the first eleven chapters of Genesis, “the
toledoth of the sons of Noah” recorded in chapter 10 is unique. After the grand universal scope of the first creation narrative (Gen 1:1–2:3) and the
more “down-to-earth” second creation and Eden story (2:4–3:24),
after the tale of social origins in chapter 4, the linear genealogy of chapter
5, and the elaborate and complex flood narrative of chapters 6–9
comes the no-less complex and elaborate genealogy of the descendants
of Noah, often dubbed “The Table of the Nations.” This “table” presents
all the peoples of the earth as an extended family group, a collection
of mishpahot. The purpose of this paper, respectfully presented
to my teacher Professor Aaron Skaist, is to offer some insight as to the
background, genre, and purpose of this chapter within the preliminary
chapters of the book of Genesis.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Summary: Tell Es-Safi/Gath is one of the largest pre-classical sites in the ancient Levant, continuously settled from the Protohistoric periods until Modern times and is identified as ancient Canaanite and Philistine Gath (known from the... more
Summary:
Tell Es-Safi/Gath is one of the largest pre-classical sites in the
ancient Levant, continuously settled from the Protohistoric periods until Modern times and is identified as ancient Canaanite and Philistine Gath (known from the el Amarna letters, Assyrian texts, and the Bible), Medieval Blanche Garde, and the modern Palestinian village of Tell es-Safi. Archaeologically, the site is of noteworthy importance in the study of the Bronze and Iron Age of the Levant, and in particular in relationship to the Canaanite, Philistine and Israelite cultures.
Since 1996, a long-term international project has been studying the cultural and environmental history of the site and its surroundings.
The volume, edited by Aren Maeir, is the first of a planned series of final reports on the project and deals primarily with the results of the 1996 through 2005 seasons. Discussions include a general overview of the project up to 2010, and studies on the geography and the environment, the written sources relating to the differ- ent periods, the history of research, the architecture and stratigraphy of the various excavation areas, and assorted finds of various classes (such as pottery, stone and bone objects, glyptic, inscriptions, and ancient fauna and flora). In addition, there are studies on pottery provenience, the archaeological surface survey, ground penetrating
radar results, data mining of pottery finds, and a general overview of the Early Bronze Age of the Judean Foothills (Shephelah).
This chapter discusses the references to Gath in the biblical text, as seen in their hostorcal and archaeological context.
Tell Es-Safi/Gath is one of the largest pre-classical sites in the
ancient Levant, continuously settled from the Protohistoric periods until Modern times and is identified as ancient Canaanite and Philistine Gath (known from the el Amarna letters, Assyrian texts, and the Bible), Medieval Blanche Garde, and the modern Palestinian village of Tell es-Safi. Archaeologically, the site is of noteworthy importance in the study of the Bronze and Iron Age of the Levant, and in particular in relationship to the Canaanite, Philistine and Israelite cultures.
Since 1996, a long-term international project has been studying the cultural and environmental history of the site and its surroundings.
The volume, edited by Aren Maeir, is the first of a planned series of final reports on the project and deals primarily with the results of the 1996 through 2005 seasons. Discussions include a general overview of the project up to 2010, and studies on the geography and the environment, the written sources relating to the differ- ent periods, the history of research, the architecture and stratigraphy of the various excavation areas, and assorted finds of various classes (such as pottery, stone and bone objects, glyptic, inscriptions, and ancient fauna and flora). In addition, there are studies on pottery provenience, the archaeological surface survey, ground penetrating
radar results, data mining of pottery finds, and a general overview of the Early Bronze Age of the Judean Foothills (Shephelah).
This chapter discusses the references to Gath in the biblical text, as seen in their hostorcal and archaeological context.
Research Interests:
This paper, presented in honor of Professor S. Vargon, deals with the inclusion of Gath in Micah’s lament for the destroyed towns of Judah in 1:10, in a way that seems to evoke David’s lament for Saul and Jonathan in 2 Sam. 1:20. The... more
This paper, presented in honor of Professor S. Vargon, deals with the inclusion of Gath in Micah’s lament for the destroyed towns of Judah in 1:10, in a way that seems to evoke David’s lament for Saul and Jonathan in 2 Sam. 1:20. The paper deals with the literary composition of the oracle and assumes that it was composed in connection with Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah in 701 B.C.E. The eleven towns listed along with Jerusalem in verses 10-15, all seem to be in the Shephelah of Judah, which makes the inclusion of Gath, presumably the well-known Philistine city, surprising. After surveying the solutions suggested by various scholars, we turn to the archaeological evidence available from the ongoing excavations at Tell es-Safi, identified as the Philistine Gath. The excavations have shown that during the 10th and 9th centuries B.C.E., Gath was one of the largest cities in the Land of Israel, certainly the most important of the Philistine cities. However at the end of the 9th century the city was destroyed and excavations have revealed a massive siege moat from the same time. The excavator has identified this as evidence that the city was conquered by Hazael king of Aram, as mentioned in 2 Kings 12:18, and referred to in Amos 6:2. Most biblical listings of the Philistine cities after this time no longer mention Gath as one of them, and archaeological evidence, including several “lmlk” stamp impressions found at the site, seems to show that Gath was taken over by the kings of Judah during the 8th century. This is also indicated by 2 Chr. 26:6. In 712 B.C.E. a town called Gath was captured by Sargon II of Assyria together with Ashdod, but not all scholars agree on the identity of this town. The well-known “Azekah Inscription” also mentions a “royal city of the Philistines that Hezekiah king of Judah had fortified” conquered by an Assyrian king; we accept Na’aman’s attribution of this inscription to Sennacherib and his original identification of the city as Gath. This, together with the “lmlk” stamp impressions and the fact that settlement at the site seems to have ended at the end of the 8th century, all serve to show that Gath of the 8th century, the city conquered and destroyed by Sennacherib, was indeed controlled by the kingdom of Judah.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
We stand here to bid farewell to Anson F. Rainey, one of the greatest scholars of Semitic languages, the history and historical geography of ancient Israel and the Ancient Near East, the Bible and biblical archaeology of our... more
We stand here to bid farewell to Anson F. Rainey, one of the greatest scholars of Semitic languages, the history and historical geography of ancient Israel and the Ancient Near East, the Bible and biblical archaeology of our generation.
Anson was born in Dallas, Texas, in 1930 and was educated at Brown Military Academy, receiving a pilot’s license and becoming a flight instructor. He then spent several years as a social worker, a job that surely influenced the way in which he would treat his students and colleagues in his later career. Then he entered the California Baptist Theological Seminary, was ordained as a minister and completed four degrees before beginning his studies in ancient history at the University of California, Los Angeles, and continuing his graduate studies at Brandies. In 1960 he came to Israel and began studying archaeology and ancient languages. He soon began teaching at both the American Institute of Holy Land Studies in Jerusalem and at the Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology, and he would remain identified with both institutions for the rest of his life. In 1983 he began teaching historical geography at Bar-Ilan University, which would become another life-long relationship. Over the years, he also spent time teaching at the University of Pennsylvania, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Konkuk University in Seoul, Korea, the University of Melbourne, Australia, and most recently at the Orot Yisrael College in Elkanah, Israel. At all of these institutions, Anson found his way into the hearts of his students, who looked up to the breadth of his knowledge, his personal openness, the way in which he encouraged his students and helped anyone and everyone that he met.
On the Sabbath of Anson’s death, we read in the synagogue about the Tablets of the Covenant. The first Tablets were made and inscribed by the finger of God and broken by Moses. The second Tablets were made by Moses but inscribed by God, “and I shall write upon the Tablets, the words that were on the first Tablets”. This story is most fitting for Anson Rainey. Anson was first and foremost a scholar of the text. He studied a wealth of languages of the Ancient Near East and the Classical world: Biblical Hebrew, Akkadian, Egyptian, Coptic, Greek and Latin, Ugaritic and Phoenician, Aramaic and Arabic and Syriac and undoubtedly some that I have omitted. He emphasized to his students the importance of reading the texts in their original language, and, perhaps like Moses, was a little disappointed when not all of them were up to the task. I doubt if there is a person yet alive who is capable of learning all that he knew. Indeed, one of his great projects of recent years has been a new reading of all of the Amarna letters from the original tablets. He managed to complete the task of reading all of the tablets in museums and collections around the world. The task of publishing the results will go to others.
But just reading the texts was not enough for Anson Rainey. He was a man of the Land, something that he learned from his beloved teacher and friend Professor Yohanan Aharoni. From his very first visit to this land, he spent many hours touring and exploring the sites mentioned in the ancient texts, and instilled in us, his students, the proper methodology of identifying those sites, through the cross-referencing of textual, toponymic and archaeological data. For someone who was not primarily an archaeologist, he had more seasons of excavation under his belt than most holders of chairs of archaeology in Israel and abroad. And all of these many fields of knowledge were included in his research.
Another lesson that Anson would have surely taken from this week’s Torah portion was the actual breaking of the Tablets, and the connection between the commandment to Moses to engrave the Second Tablets and the graven image of the Golden Calf. Because despite the great respect that Anson had for the text, he was not afraid, in his own way, to smash some golden calves of his own. Anson understood that the text was, in the end, a human creation, that reflected the beliefs and concerns of the people who created it. Anson considered the text to be a means of understanding those people and of preserving their heritage for our own day.
On a personal level, Anson was tied to this land and to this nation with all his heart and soul. He travelled the difficult road from the Evangelical seminary to Judaism, though he never looked down upon the place from which he had come. He arrived in a new country, established a home and a family. He was a proud Zionist in an academic world in which such pride is all too rare.
To us, his students, Anson symbolized the height of our academic aspirations: knowledgeable, with solidly-held views, and a great teacher, who loved nothing more than standing in the classroom and interacting with students. “A classroom junkie”, he once called himself. But also a wonderful person, helping those who needed, visiting the ill and wounded, comforting the bereaved, he helped each and every one of us as much as he could. In his final days, when it was clear that his end was near, he took comfort in the knowledge that his work would be continued, and in the many of his students who came to be with him in his hour of need.
Anson, after such a long road, from the plains of Texas to the hills of Samaria, you deserve to rest. It is time to say good-bye. I am certain that you will find worthy opponents for a good argument up there as well. We can only be grateful that we were privileged to learn from you and with you.
Anson was born in Dallas, Texas, in 1930 and was educated at Brown Military Academy, receiving a pilot’s license and becoming a flight instructor. He then spent several years as a social worker, a job that surely influenced the way in which he would treat his students and colleagues in his later career. Then he entered the California Baptist Theological Seminary, was ordained as a minister and completed four degrees before beginning his studies in ancient history at the University of California, Los Angeles, and continuing his graduate studies at Brandies. In 1960 he came to Israel and began studying archaeology and ancient languages. He soon began teaching at both the American Institute of Holy Land Studies in Jerusalem and at the Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology, and he would remain identified with both institutions for the rest of his life. In 1983 he began teaching historical geography at Bar-Ilan University, which would become another life-long relationship. Over the years, he also spent time teaching at the University of Pennsylvania, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Konkuk University in Seoul, Korea, the University of Melbourne, Australia, and most recently at the Orot Yisrael College in Elkanah, Israel. At all of these institutions, Anson found his way into the hearts of his students, who looked up to the breadth of his knowledge, his personal openness, the way in which he encouraged his students and helped anyone and everyone that he met.
On the Sabbath of Anson’s death, we read in the synagogue about the Tablets of the Covenant. The first Tablets were made and inscribed by the finger of God and broken by Moses. The second Tablets were made by Moses but inscribed by God, “and I shall write upon the Tablets, the words that were on the first Tablets”. This story is most fitting for Anson Rainey. Anson was first and foremost a scholar of the text. He studied a wealth of languages of the Ancient Near East and the Classical world: Biblical Hebrew, Akkadian, Egyptian, Coptic, Greek and Latin, Ugaritic and Phoenician, Aramaic and Arabic and Syriac and undoubtedly some that I have omitted. He emphasized to his students the importance of reading the texts in their original language, and, perhaps like Moses, was a little disappointed when not all of them were up to the task. I doubt if there is a person yet alive who is capable of learning all that he knew. Indeed, one of his great projects of recent years has been a new reading of all of the Amarna letters from the original tablets. He managed to complete the task of reading all of the tablets in museums and collections around the world. The task of publishing the results will go to others.
But just reading the texts was not enough for Anson Rainey. He was a man of the Land, something that he learned from his beloved teacher and friend Professor Yohanan Aharoni. From his very first visit to this land, he spent many hours touring and exploring the sites mentioned in the ancient texts, and instilled in us, his students, the proper methodology of identifying those sites, through the cross-referencing of textual, toponymic and archaeological data. For someone who was not primarily an archaeologist, he had more seasons of excavation under his belt than most holders of chairs of archaeology in Israel and abroad. And all of these many fields of knowledge were included in his research.
Another lesson that Anson would have surely taken from this week’s Torah portion was the actual breaking of the Tablets, and the connection between the commandment to Moses to engrave the Second Tablets and the graven image of the Golden Calf. Because despite the great respect that Anson had for the text, he was not afraid, in his own way, to smash some golden calves of his own. Anson understood that the text was, in the end, a human creation, that reflected the beliefs and concerns of the people who created it. Anson considered the text to be a means of understanding those people and of preserving their heritage for our own day.
On a personal level, Anson was tied to this land and to this nation with all his heart and soul. He travelled the difficult road from the Evangelical seminary to Judaism, though he never looked down upon the place from which he had come. He arrived in a new country, established a home and a family. He was a proud Zionist in an academic world in which such pride is all too rare.
To us, his students, Anson symbolized the height of our academic aspirations: knowledgeable, with solidly-held views, and a great teacher, who loved nothing more than standing in the classroom and interacting with students. “A classroom junkie”, he once called himself. But also a wonderful person, helping those who needed, visiting the ill and wounded, comforting the bereaved, he helped each and every one of us as much as he could. In his final days, when it was clear that his end was near, he took comfort in the knowledge that his work would be continued, and in the many of his students who came to be with him in his hour of need.
Anson, after such a long road, from the plains of Texas to the hills of Samaria, you deserve to rest. It is time to say good-bye. I am certain that you will find worthy opponents for a good argument up there as well. We can only be grateful that we were privileged to learn from you and with you.
Research Interests:
This article proposes that the Joseph narrative in Genesis was given its final form sometime after the split of the monarchy, in order to explain the continued inclusion of the formerly northern tribe of Benjamin within the kingdom of... more
This article proposes that the Joseph narrative in Genesis was given its final form sometime after the split of the monarchy, in order to explain the continued inclusion of the formerly northern tribe of Benjamin within the kingdom of Judah. Considering the Benjaminites’ traditional ties to the Joseph tribes, this must have been achieved by a combination of military, political and economic force by a desperate Rehoboam and later depicted by the Deuteronomistic writer of I Reg as reflecting their free choice. Indeed, there is
evidence that not all of the tribe’s towns and clans remained in Judah. The Joseph story itself is a vital link in the Primary History and as such must have a long tradition history, but its present form, emphasizing the competition between Joseph and Judah over the »protection« of Benjamin, is seen to reflect this struggle. »The Benjamin Conundrum« presented to those scholars who deny the historicity of the United Monarchy and hence of its split, is why the biblical authors would even bother to mention such figures as Saul and the Benjaminites’ northern ties, unless they were common knowledge at the time that the accounts were composed, and if so, what other explanation is there for the annexation of Israelian Benjamin by the weaker and less developed kingdom of Judah?
evidence that not all of the tribe’s towns and clans remained in Judah. The Joseph story itself is a vital link in the Primary History and as such must have a long tradition history, but its present form, emphasizing the competition between Joseph and Judah over the »protection« of Benjamin, is seen to reflect this struggle. »The Benjamin Conundrum« presented to those scholars who deny the historicity of the United Monarchy and hence of its split, is why the biblical authors would even bother to mention such figures as Saul and the Benjaminites’ northern ties, unless they were common knowledge at the time that the accounts were composed, and if so, what other explanation is there for the annexation of Israelian Benjamin by the weaker and less developed kingdom of Judah?
Research Interests:
Review of Bob Becking, Israel’s Past Seen from the Present: Studies on History and Religion in Ancient Israel and Judah, Review of Biblical Literature 12/2022, https://www.sblcentral.org/API/Reviews/1001028_72309.pdf
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Review of Brian R. Doak, Ancient Israel’s Neighbors (Essentials of Biblical Studies), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. Pp. 224. Paper.
ISBN 9780190690601.
ISBN 9780190690601.
Research Interests:
This rather massive volume can be considered to be the culmination of William Dever’s lifelong career as what he would rather not call a “biblical archaeologist”— indeed, at the very outset he explains that “this book has been in the... more
This rather massive volume can be considered to be the culmination of William Dever’s lifelong career as what he would rather not call a “biblical archaeologist”— indeed, at the very outset he explains that “this book has been in the making for nearly sixty years” (ix). Coming on the heels of about fifteen books and countless articles that Dever has authored or edited, ranging from archaeological reports to books that deal with biblical issues in the light of archaeology, this volume can be seen as Dever’s chance to summarize his views on the various issues at hand and to respond to his opponents— and respond he does.
Research Interests:
Review of: Jordan Guy, United in Exile, Reunited in Restoration: The
Chronicler’s Agenda
Hebrew Bible Monographs 81
Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2019. Pp. xiv + 244.
Hardcover. $65.00. ISBN 9781910928561.
Chronicler’s Agenda
Hebrew Bible Monographs 81
Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2019. Pp. xiv + 244.
Hardcover. $65.00. ISBN 9781910928561.
Research Interests:
Review of: Tova Ganzel, Yehudah Brandes, Chayuta Deutsch, eds. The Believer and the Modern Study of the Bible. Boston: Academic Studies Press, 2019. 582 pp. $45.00, paper, ISBN 978-1-64469-257-8. Reviewed by Yigal Levin (Bar Ilan... more
Review of: Tova Ganzel, Yehudah Brandes, Chayuta Deutsch, eds. The Believer and the Modern Study of the Bible.
Boston: Academic Studies Press, 2019. 582 pp. $45.00, paper, ISBN 978-1-64469-257-8.
Reviewed by Yigal Levin (Bar Ilan University)
Published on H-Judaic (April, 2020)
Boston: Academic Studies Press, 2019. 582 pp. $45.00, paper, ISBN 978-1-64469-257-8.
Reviewed by Yigal Levin (Bar Ilan University)
Published on H-Judaic (April, 2020)
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Review of A. Faust,
The Archaeology of Israelite Society in Iron Age II
(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012)
and
Judah in the Neo-Babylonian Period: The Archaeology of Desolation
(Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature,
2012).
The Archaeology of Israelite Society in Iron Age II
(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012)
and
Judah in the Neo-Babylonian Period: The Archaeology of Desolation
(Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature,
2012).
Research Interests:
Review of EZRA’S SOCIAL DRAMA: IDENTITY FORMATION, MARRIAGE AND SOCIAL CONFLICT IN EZRA 9 AND 10. By Donald P. Moffat. LHBOTS 579. Pp. xiii + 218. London: Bloomsbury, 2013. Cloth, $110.00. Paper, $39.95.
Hebrew Studies 57 (2016), 455-458
Hebrew Studies 57 (2016), 455-458
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
"When I first received this volume for review, I wondered how Brian R. Doak, an Associate Professor of Biblical Studies at George Fox University in Oregon who has written in the past about the Phoenicians, could have the audacity to even... more
"When I first received this volume for review, I wondered how Brian R. Doak, an Associate Professor of Biblical Studies at George Fox University in Oregon who has written in the past about the Phoenicians, could have the audacity to even attempt to cover all of ancient Israel’s neighbors in one short volume. In most volumes of this sort, such as The World around the Old Testament: The People and Places of the Ancient Near East (ed. Bill T. Arnold and Brent A. Strawn; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2016), each chapter is written by an expert on that particular group or region, and I assumed that no single author would be able to cover so many different topics successfully.
Doak proved me wrong. While the volume does have its deficiencies, in the end it can serve as a reasonably good introduction for the beginning student to the world of the Iron Age Levant, perhaps as a complement to Victor H. Matthew’s The History of Bronze and Iron Age Israel (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), also in the Essentials of Biblical Studies series. In fact, as I read through the introductory chapter on “Israel’s Neighbors and the Problem of the Past” (1–21), I found that its explanations of such subjects as “Nations and Identity in the Ancient World” and “How Do We Know Anything about the Past?” echo many of my own experiences in teaching these subjects in undergraduate settings. Doak manages to lay out the main issues about the study of the biblical world, especially of the problems involved in using the Bible as a source of historical information, in a way that is easy to understand without being overly didactic."
Doak proved me wrong. While the volume does have its deficiencies, in the end it can serve as a reasonably good introduction for the beginning student to the world of the Iron Age Levant, perhaps as a complement to Victor H. Matthew’s The History of Bronze and Iron Age Israel (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), also in the Essentials of Biblical Studies series. In fact, as I read through the introductory chapter on “Israel’s Neighbors and the Problem of the Past” (1–21), I found that its explanations of such subjects as “Nations and Identity in the Ancient World” and “How Do We Know Anything about the Past?” echo many of my own experiences in teaching these subjects in undergraduate settings. Doak manages to lay out the main issues about the study of the biblical world, especially of the problems involved in using the Bible as a source of historical information, in a way that is easy to understand without being overly didactic."
Research Interests:
Dear Friends and Colleagues, On the morning of October 7, ca. 2000 HAMAS terrorists launched a brutal attack on civilians in Israeli kibbutzim, moshavim and towns adjacent to the Gaza Strip. They went from house to house to burn, torture,... more
Dear Friends and Colleagues, On the morning of October 7, ca. 2000 HAMAS terrorists launched a brutal attack on civilians in Israeli kibbutzim, moshavim and towns adjacent to the Gaza Strip. They went from house to house to burn, torture, mutilate, and kill Jewish families. They gunned down hundreds of young people at an outdoor music festival that turned into a scene of rape and massacre. Not only did they kill parents in front of children, raped women and children, murdered children and soldiers still asleep in their beds, but also beheaded babies that were sleeping in their cribs.