Dr. Chris McKinny is the Director of Research at Gesher Media, where he is working on several major projects including the theatrical documdrama Legends of the Lost Ark (creator, writer, and host). Chris serves as faculty member at Jerusalem University College. As an active archaeologist and biblical scholar with a Ph.D. from Bar-Ilan University in Israel, Chris frequently publishes articles in peer-reviewed journals and teaches courses on biblical archaeology and historical geography. He also co-hosts the “Biblical World” and “Behind the Bible” podcasts, which explore the archaeological, historical, geographical, and cultural backgrounds of the Bible. Chris is also a core staff member of the Tel Burna Archaeological Project and is involved in numerous other writing and research projects. Supervisors: Prof. Aren Maier and Dr. Yigal Levin
My People as Your People provides an in-depth analysis of the chronology, history, and archaeolog... more My People as Your People provides an in-depth analysis of the chronology, history, and archaeology associated with the reign of Jehoshaphat of Judah. The synthesis of these various elements illuminates a diverse geo-political picture of the southern Levant in the mid-ninth century BCE. In recent years, archaeologists and biblical scholars have dealt quite extensively with the tenth and eighth centuries BCE due to both the controversial aspects of recent interpretations associated with the so-called United Kingdom and the established archaeological data relating to Judah’s rise as a significant polity in the eighth century BCE. On the other hand, the ninth century BCE has received considerably less scholarly treatment, despite the fact that many new archaeological strata have been uncovered in recent years that have a direct bearing upon this period. My People as Your People is an attempt to fill this gap in our knowledge. In accomplishing this, it both provides a nuanced understanding of Judah in the mid-ninth century BCE and also demonstrates the significance of this period in the larger setting of the history of the Divided Kingdom.
Abram (Genesis 12, 8; 13, 3) and Jacob (ibid. 28, 19; 35, 6) each visited the Bethel region on tw... more Abram (Genesis 12, 8; 13, 3) and Jacob (ibid. 28, 19; 35, 6) each visited the Bethel region on two separate occasions. On three of these visits, Yahweh reaffirmed his promise of land and descendants to them (ibid. 13, 3; 28, 19; 35, 6). One element of God’s promise to all the patriarchs was that they would be given innumerable offspring. Several metaphors were employed to demonstrate the unquantifiability nature of their descendants, including “the dust of the earth” (ibid. 13, 16; 28, 14), “the stars of heaven” (ibid. 15, 5; 22, 17; 26, 4), and “the sand on the seashore” (ibid. 22, 17; 32, 12). In this paper, I will demonstrate that the “dust of the earth” metaphor – which is used only in the region of Bethel – has a geographical pun that has not yet been observed by commentators.
Garfinkel, Ganor, and Keimer’s ongoing excavations at Khirbet er-Raʿi have revealed a significant... more Garfinkel, Ganor, and Keimer’s ongoing excavations at Khirbet er-Raʿi have revealed a significant Iron I settlement with Philistine pottery and a small Early Iron IIA settlement. In light of this, and their analysis of the biblical sources, Garfinkel and Ganor propose that Khirbet er-Raʿi matches the historical-geographical details for Ziklag. This paper will challenge this identification and suggest a possible alternative ancient name for Khirbet er- Raʿi in light of the writings of Eusebius and existing Arabic toponyms in the vicinity.
Archaeological Excavations and Research Studies in Southern Israel, 2022
Tel Burna—widely identified as biblical Libnah—and Khirbet el-‘Atar, c. 2 km north, occupy both s... more Tel Burna—widely identified as biblical Libnah—and Khirbet el-‘Atar, c. 2 km north, occupy both sides of Naḥal Guvrin in the western Shephelah. At Tel Burna, excavations have revealed a prominent casemate fortification wall that encloses the site’s summit and is confidently dated to the Iron Age II. It was established at the early stages of the Iron Age II and was apparently used for several centuries, albeit with some changes. Previous surveys at Khirbat el-‘Atar indicated that this site was also occupied during the Iron Age II, and its topography is similar to that of Tel Burna. In November 2020, a highresolution survey was conducted at Khirbat el-‘Atar to better determine the periods of occupation at the site, explore the nature of its enclosed summit, and conduct a preliminary comparison with the Tel Burna excavations. Although no excavation has been held at Khirbat el-‘Atar, the survey’s results allow us to produce an initial exploratory reconstruction of the site’s occupational sequences during the Iron Age II and enrich our understanding of the geopolitical changes in the region.
The identification of the biblical מלוא (millôʾ; Millo) in Jerusalem (e.g., 2 Sam 5:9) has long b... more The identification of the biblical מלוא (millôʾ; Millo) in Jerusalem (e.g., 2 Sam 5:9) has long been debated. Considering recent archaeological investigations in the vicinity of the Gihon Spring in the city of David, this paper argues that the Millo and the related בית מלוא (“house of Millo,” 2 Kgs 12:21) should be connected with the fortifications that surrounded the Gihon Spring—the primary water source for Bronze and Iron Age Jerusalem.
In this paper, I will discuss the historical geography of the “sons” of Aram who appear in the so... more In this paper, I will discuss the historical geography of the “sons” of Aram who appear in the so-called Table of Nations in the genealogy of Shem (Gen 10:23; 1 Chr 1:17). I will evaluate the neglected proposal that “#ul” is preserved by the #uleh Lake (ancient Lake Ulatha) in light of recent archaeological surveys in the region. This survey data will also be discussed in relation to the suggestion to identify Gesher with et-Tell and its vicinity. Finally, I will argue that “Mash” can be reconstructed to “Maacah” and af- filiated with the site of Abel-beth-maacah (Tell Abil el-Qameh), which will also be com- pared to the geography of the “sons of Nahor” (Gen 22:20–24).
החפירות שנערכו לאחרונה באזור מעיין הגיחון שבעיר דוד ערערו את המוסכמות שהיו מקובלות בעבר במחקר של ... more החפירות שנערכו לאחרונה באזור מעיין הגיחון שבעיר דוד ערערו את המוסכמות שהיו מקובלות בעבר במחקר של ירושלים הקדומה. תאריכי פחמן 14 שנלקחו ממגדל המעיין מלמדים כי הביצורים שסביב המעיין, שבעבר ייוחסו לתקופת הברונזה התיכונה, נבנו בשלהי המאה התשיעית לפסה"נ או שרק חוזקו מחדש בתקופה זו. לאור המידע הארכיאולוגי החדש, נבחן מחדש את המידע מהמקורות המקראיים על אודות המדרונות המזרחיים של עיר דוד בתקופת ממלכת יהודה, ונציע לזהות את מגדל המעיין עם "בית מילוא" (מלכים ב יב, כ), שבו, על-פי התיאור, נרצח יואש מלך יהודה בשנת 796 לפסה"נ. נראה כי אזור ה"מילוא" היה האזור המשמעותי בירושלים בתקופות עבר, וכן אחת מנקודת התורפה של ירושלים בשלהי המאה התשיעית לפסה"נ ובראשית המאה השמינית לפסה"נ, וכי הבנייה או הביצור מחדש של מגדל המעיין בתקופה זו משקפים את הצורך בהגנת ושיקום ירושלים מפני תקיפה אפשרית של הארמים. ייתכן אף שהרצח של יואש דווקא בבית מילוא, משקף את ההתנגדות לגישתו התקיפה של יואש כנגד חזאל מלך ארם
In the summer of 2015, the Tel Burna Excavation Project in Israel opened Area C, with the goal of... more In the summer of 2015, the Tel Burna Excavation Project in Israel opened Area C, with the goal of better understanding the adjacent agricultural areas. During the 2015 and 2016 seasons, installations of various sizes and shapes were found carved out of the limestone bedrock. Although some Byzantine and Persian occupation is known at the site, survey results from this area demonstrate the predominance of Bronze Age occupations and Iron Age II finds concurrent with excavated areas on the tell. Rock-cut installations revealed exclusively Bronze and Iron Age finds. Finds on the limestone bedrock surface included basalt grinding stones, flint blades, and several incomplete ceramic vessels from the Late Bronze IIB and Iron Age II. Although the lack of architecture and stratified contexts obscures an exact dating, ceramic finds suggest that these agricultural installations were used and reused throughout the occupation of Tel Burna. The results from Area C provide insights into the agricultural economy of the Bronze and Iron Age Shephelah.
Ashkelon and Its Environs Studies of the Southern Coastal Plain and the Judean Foothills in Honor of Dr. Nahum Sagiv, 2020
Tel Burna is a multi-period site located in the Shephelah. The Late Bronze
Age was one of the two... more Tel Burna is a multi-period site located in the Shephelah. The Late Bronze Age was one of the two main periods during which the site was inhabited. In this paper, we will present the various finds dating to this period, focusing on the public building that was discovered on its western side. The building and the finds provide a window into the cult practice of the period, which reflected the international relationship and the character of the material culture of the people of the Land of Israel in the Late Bronze Age.
Votive objects are a common part of cult and ritual throughout the
world. In this study, we prese... more Votive objects are a common part of cult and ritual throughout the world. In this study, we present and discuss two miniature votive vessels and other related ritual deposits from a Late Bronze cultic enclosure at Tel Burna, Israel. We conclude that the Cypriot character of many of the finds (including one of the two votive objects) might indicate that the cult centre was established by merchants during the Late Bronze Age.
As our project at Tel Burna enters the tenth season of excavations, we have compiled a summary of... more As our project at Tel Burna enters the tenth season of excavations, we have compiled a summary of the archaeological finds from 2009–2018. Tel Burna is located in the southern Shephelah in modern-day southern Israel. The Judean Shephelah is comprised of foothills above several east–west valleys that drain the Judean incline in the east to the coastal plain in the west. These valleys were strategic agricultural zones and trade routes throughout history, and in particular during the Late Bronze and Iron Ages. Tel Burna is situated on a natural hill in the middle of Nahal Guvrin, one of the main roads through the Judean Shephelah.
The Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages of Southern Canaan, 2019
Over the last decade, new excavations (see below) and the publication of survey materials (cf. Da... more Over the last decade, new excavations (see below) and the publication of survey materials (cf. Dagan 2000, 2010, 2011b) have shown that the Late Bronze Age (LB) was a period of great significance in the Shephelah. Unlike most of the southern Levant, settlement in the Shephelah during the LB (56 sites actually increased following the Middle Bronze (MB) II (47 sites). This evidence seems to indicate that the Shephelah was more immune to the destabilizing forces that characterized the southern Levant during the transition between the MB and LB (e.g., Gonen 1984, 1992b, 1992a; Mazar 1990: 239–241; Weinstein 1991; Fischer 2006; Maeir 2010: 165–178). The historical rationale for this relative immunity goes beyond the scope of our paper, however, in what follows we would like to layout the current archaeological landscape of the Shephelah during the LB with a specific emphasis on the 13th century BCE, which to date is the only phase from the LB that we have excavated at Tel Burna. In order to accomplish this, we will compare the excavated results of the main archaeological sites of the Shephelah that were inhabited during the LB to the contemporaneous remains from Tel Burna.
Several unique toponyms (Lehi, Gob, Ephes-dammim, etc.) are mentioned in the books of Judges and ... more Several unique toponyms (Lehi, Gob, Ephes-dammim, etc.) are mentioned in the books of Judges and Samuel in connection with the Israelite-Philistine conflicts. Among these, Lehi and its variants are associated with the biblical characters of Samson and Shammah (the son of Agee), but the exact location of Lehi has not been determined. This paper examines the available evidence relating to Lehi, and offers the tentative identification of ʿAin Hanniyeh as the location of En-hakkore and Ramath-lehi within the larger region of Lehi.
My People as Your People provides an in-depth analysis of the chronology, history, and archaeolog... more My People as Your People provides an in-depth analysis of the chronology, history, and archaeology associated with the reign of Jehoshaphat of Judah. The synthesis of these various elements illuminates a diverse geo-political picture of the southern Levant in the mid-ninth century BCE. In recent years, archaeologists and biblical scholars have dealt quite extensively with the tenth and eighth centuries BCE due to both the controversial aspects of recent interpretations associated with the so-called United Kingdom and the established archaeological data relating to Judah’s rise as a significant polity in the eighth century BCE. On the other hand, the ninth century BCE has received considerably less scholarly treatment, despite the fact that many new archaeological strata have been uncovered in recent years that have a direct bearing upon this period. My People as Your People is an attempt to fill this gap in our knowledge. In accomplishing this, it both provides a nuanced understanding of Judah in the mid-ninth century BCE and also demonstrates the significance of this period in the larger setting of the history of the Divided Kingdom.
Abram (Genesis 12, 8; 13, 3) and Jacob (ibid. 28, 19; 35, 6) each visited the Bethel region on tw... more Abram (Genesis 12, 8; 13, 3) and Jacob (ibid. 28, 19; 35, 6) each visited the Bethel region on two separate occasions. On three of these visits, Yahweh reaffirmed his promise of land and descendants to them (ibid. 13, 3; 28, 19; 35, 6). One element of God’s promise to all the patriarchs was that they would be given innumerable offspring. Several metaphors were employed to demonstrate the unquantifiability nature of their descendants, including “the dust of the earth” (ibid. 13, 16; 28, 14), “the stars of heaven” (ibid. 15, 5; 22, 17; 26, 4), and “the sand on the seashore” (ibid. 22, 17; 32, 12). In this paper, I will demonstrate that the “dust of the earth” metaphor – which is used only in the region of Bethel – has a geographical pun that has not yet been observed by commentators.
Garfinkel, Ganor, and Keimer’s ongoing excavations at Khirbet er-Raʿi have revealed a significant... more Garfinkel, Ganor, and Keimer’s ongoing excavations at Khirbet er-Raʿi have revealed a significant Iron I settlement with Philistine pottery and a small Early Iron IIA settlement. In light of this, and their analysis of the biblical sources, Garfinkel and Ganor propose that Khirbet er-Raʿi matches the historical-geographical details for Ziklag. This paper will challenge this identification and suggest a possible alternative ancient name for Khirbet er- Raʿi in light of the writings of Eusebius and existing Arabic toponyms in the vicinity.
Archaeological Excavations and Research Studies in Southern Israel, 2022
Tel Burna—widely identified as biblical Libnah—and Khirbet el-‘Atar, c. 2 km north, occupy both s... more Tel Burna—widely identified as biblical Libnah—and Khirbet el-‘Atar, c. 2 km north, occupy both sides of Naḥal Guvrin in the western Shephelah. At Tel Burna, excavations have revealed a prominent casemate fortification wall that encloses the site’s summit and is confidently dated to the Iron Age II. It was established at the early stages of the Iron Age II and was apparently used for several centuries, albeit with some changes. Previous surveys at Khirbat el-‘Atar indicated that this site was also occupied during the Iron Age II, and its topography is similar to that of Tel Burna. In November 2020, a highresolution survey was conducted at Khirbat el-‘Atar to better determine the periods of occupation at the site, explore the nature of its enclosed summit, and conduct a preliminary comparison with the Tel Burna excavations. Although no excavation has been held at Khirbat el-‘Atar, the survey’s results allow us to produce an initial exploratory reconstruction of the site’s occupational sequences during the Iron Age II and enrich our understanding of the geopolitical changes in the region.
The identification of the biblical מלוא (millôʾ; Millo) in Jerusalem (e.g., 2 Sam 5:9) has long b... more The identification of the biblical מלוא (millôʾ; Millo) in Jerusalem (e.g., 2 Sam 5:9) has long been debated. Considering recent archaeological investigations in the vicinity of the Gihon Spring in the city of David, this paper argues that the Millo and the related בית מלוא (“house of Millo,” 2 Kgs 12:21) should be connected with the fortifications that surrounded the Gihon Spring—the primary water source for Bronze and Iron Age Jerusalem.
In this paper, I will discuss the historical geography of the “sons” of Aram who appear in the so... more In this paper, I will discuss the historical geography of the “sons” of Aram who appear in the so-called Table of Nations in the genealogy of Shem (Gen 10:23; 1 Chr 1:17). I will evaluate the neglected proposal that “#ul” is preserved by the #uleh Lake (ancient Lake Ulatha) in light of recent archaeological surveys in the region. This survey data will also be discussed in relation to the suggestion to identify Gesher with et-Tell and its vicinity. Finally, I will argue that “Mash” can be reconstructed to “Maacah” and af- filiated with the site of Abel-beth-maacah (Tell Abil el-Qameh), which will also be com- pared to the geography of the “sons of Nahor” (Gen 22:20–24).
החפירות שנערכו לאחרונה באזור מעיין הגיחון שבעיר דוד ערערו את המוסכמות שהיו מקובלות בעבר במחקר של ... more החפירות שנערכו לאחרונה באזור מעיין הגיחון שבעיר דוד ערערו את המוסכמות שהיו מקובלות בעבר במחקר של ירושלים הקדומה. תאריכי פחמן 14 שנלקחו ממגדל המעיין מלמדים כי הביצורים שסביב המעיין, שבעבר ייוחסו לתקופת הברונזה התיכונה, נבנו בשלהי המאה התשיעית לפסה"נ או שרק חוזקו מחדש בתקופה זו. לאור המידע הארכיאולוגי החדש, נבחן מחדש את המידע מהמקורות המקראיים על אודות המדרונות המזרחיים של עיר דוד בתקופת ממלכת יהודה, ונציע לזהות את מגדל המעיין עם "בית מילוא" (מלכים ב יב, כ), שבו, על-פי התיאור, נרצח יואש מלך יהודה בשנת 796 לפסה"נ. נראה כי אזור ה"מילוא" היה האזור המשמעותי בירושלים בתקופות עבר, וכן אחת מנקודת התורפה של ירושלים בשלהי המאה התשיעית לפסה"נ ובראשית המאה השמינית לפסה"נ, וכי הבנייה או הביצור מחדש של מגדל המעיין בתקופה זו משקפים את הצורך בהגנת ושיקום ירושלים מפני תקיפה אפשרית של הארמים. ייתכן אף שהרצח של יואש דווקא בבית מילוא, משקף את ההתנגדות לגישתו התקיפה של יואש כנגד חזאל מלך ארם
In the summer of 2015, the Tel Burna Excavation Project in Israel opened Area C, with the goal of... more In the summer of 2015, the Tel Burna Excavation Project in Israel opened Area C, with the goal of better understanding the adjacent agricultural areas. During the 2015 and 2016 seasons, installations of various sizes and shapes were found carved out of the limestone bedrock. Although some Byzantine and Persian occupation is known at the site, survey results from this area demonstrate the predominance of Bronze Age occupations and Iron Age II finds concurrent with excavated areas on the tell. Rock-cut installations revealed exclusively Bronze and Iron Age finds. Finds on the limestone bedrock surface included basalt grinding stones, flint blades, and several incomplete ceramic vessels from the Late Bronze IIB and Iron Age II. Although the lack of architecture and stratified contexts obscures an exact dating, ceramic finds suggest that these agricultural installations were used and reused throughout the occupation of Tel Burna. The results from Area C provide insights into the agricultural economy of the Bronze and Iron Age Shephelah.
Ashkelon and Its Environs Studies of the Southern Coastal Plain and the Judean Foothills in Honor of Dr. Nahum Sagiv, 2020
Tel Burna is a multi-period site located in the Shephelah. The Late Bronze
Age was one of the two... more Tel Burna is a multi-period site located in the Shephelah. The Late Bronze Age was one of the two main periods during which the site was inhabited. In this paper, we will present the various finds dating to this period, focusing on the public building that was discovered on its western side. The building and the finds provide a window into the cult practice of the period, which reflected the international relationship and the character of the material culture of the people of the Land of Israel in the Late Bronze Age.
Votive objects are a common part of cult and ritual throughout the
world. In this study, we prese... more Votive objects are a common part of cult and ritual throughout the world. In this study, we present and discuss two miniature votive vessels and other related ritual deposits from a Late Bronze cultic enclosure at Tel Burna, Israel. We conclude that the Cypriot character of many of the finds (including one of the two votive objects) might indicate that the cult centre was established by merchants during the Late Bronze Age.
As our project at Tel Burna enters the tenth season of excavations, we have compiled a summary of... more As our project at Tel Burna enters the tenth season of excavations, we have compiled a summary of the archaeological finds from 2009–2018. Tel Burna is located in the southern Shephelah in modern-day southern Israel. The Judean Shephelah is comprised of foothills above several east–west valleys that drain the Judean incline in the east to the coastal plain in the west. These valleys were strategic agricultural zones and trade routes throughout history, and in particular during the Late Bronze and Iron Ages. Tel Burna is situated on a natural hill in the middle of Nahal Guvrin, one of the main roads through the Judean Shephelah.
The Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages of Southern Canaan, 2019
Over the last decade, new excavations (see below) and the publication of survey materials (cf. Da... more Over the last decade, new excavations (see below) and the publication of survey materials (cf. Dagan 2000, 2010, 2011b) have shown that the Late Bronze Age (LB) was a period of great significance in the Shephelah. Unlike most of the southern Levant, settlement in the Shephelah during the LB (56 sites actually increased following the Middle Bronze (MB) II (47 sites). This evidence seems to indicate that the Shephelah was more immune to the destabilizing forces that characterized the southern Levant during the transition between the MB and LB (e.g., Gonen 1984, 1992b, 1992a; Mazar 1990: 239–241; Weinstein 1991; Fischer 2006; Maeir 2010: 165–178). The historical rationale for this relative immunity goes beyond the scope of our paper, however, in what follows we would like to layout the current archaeological landscape of the Shephelah during the LB with a specific emphasis on the 13th century BCE, which to date is the only phase from the LB that we have excavated at Tel Burna. In order to accomplish this, we will compare the excavated results of the main archaeological sites of the Shephelah that were inhabited during the LB to the contemporaneous remains from Tel Burna.
Several unique toponyms (Lehi, Gob, Ephes-dammim, etc.) are mentioned in the books of Judges and ... more Several unique toponyms (Lehi, Gob, Ephes-dammim, etc.) are mentioned in the books of Judges and Samuel in connection with the Israelite-Philistine conflicts. Among these, Lehi and its variants are associated with the biblical characters of Samson and Shammah (the son of Agee), but the exact location of Lehi has not been determined. This paper examines the available evidence relating to Lehi, and offers the tentative identification of ʿAin Hanniyeh as the location of En-hakkore and Ramath-lehi within the larger region of Lehi.
Bronze Age trade in the Eastern Mediterranean is well attested in south
Levantine archaeological ... more Bronze Age trade in the Eastern Mediterranean is well attested in south Levantine archaeological research, with imported vessels generally playing a significant role in the ceramic assemblage. While the majority of these vessels are found repeatedly at many different sites, there are cases where a rare find sheds new light on the way in which trade patterns are perceived. Such is the case with two fully restored pithoi found in a Late Bronze IIB building at Tel Burna. This paper presents the context in which the pithoi were uncovered, followed by a study of the vessels themselves, including their typology, provenance, volume and contents, as well as the nature of Late Bronze Age trade in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Exploring the Holy Land - 150 Years of the Palestine Exploration Fund (eds. D. Guervich and A. Kidron), 2018
There are three instances of toponyms based on לבנ (lavan) in the Bible. These include Libnah/Lab... more There are three instances of toponyms based on לבנ (lavan) in the Bible. These include Libnah/Laban of the wilderness Sinai wanderings (Num 33:20; Deut 1:1), Lebonah of Ephraim (Judg 21:19), and Libnah of the Judean Shephelah (e.g., Josh 10:29–31). Notably, the last two are possibly preserved in Arabic toponyms from 19th century Palestine. These toponyms were recorded with varying spellings in such cartographic projects as the Van de Van de Velde’s Map of the Holy Land (1858a; 1858b; 1865), Warren’s unpublished Reconnaissance of the Plain of Philistia (1867), and Conder and Kitchener’s Survey of Western Palestine (1880; 1882; 1883), the last two conducted under the auspices of the Palestine Exploration Fund. Using these and other cartographic sources as the basis for our discussion, we will analyse the etymology and site identifications of Lebonah of Ephraim and Libnah of the Shephelah in connection with their occurrences in the various post-biblical sources, with the purpose of understanding the linguistic development of the לבנ toponyms from the biblical period to pre-modern times. Our analysis shows that the toponymic history of these sites corroborates the current identifications of Lebonah with El-Lubban and Libnah with Tell Bornat.
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 (eds. Shai, I., Chadwick, J. R., Hitchcock, L. A., Dagan, A., McKinny, C., and Uziel, J.), 2018
In light of the accepted identification of Philistine Gath with Tell eṣ-Ṣâfi, which has been c... more In light of the accepted identification of Philistine Gath with Tell eṣ-Ṣâfi, which has been clearly confirmed by Maeir’s excavations over the last two decades (Maeir 2012a), this paper will re-examine the identifications of the southern biblical towns of Gath-rimmon, Gittaim, and non-Philistine Gath. For each of these sites, I will consider the available archaeological, toponymic, geographic and textual evidence. Through this analysis a new identification for the “other” Gath will be suggested. Besides offering possible site identifications, the purpose of this paper is to better understand the dynamic border between Israel and Judah in the northern Shephelah/Aijalon Valley as reflected in the northernmost Shephelah district of Judah (Josh 15:33-36), the Rehoboam fortification list (2 Chr 11:6-10), and other texts. As we shall demonstrate, the western portion of the border between the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah is not well-defined in the biblical text nor has it received much scholarly attention or archaeological investigation. Accordingly, this paper will seek to provide a historical geographical foundation for further study in the region of the eastern Aijalon Valley.
This paper discusses the history of research at Deir el-ʿÂzar (Tel Qiryat Yeʿarim), including a d... more This paper discusses the history of research at Deir el-ʿÂzar (Tel Qiryat Yeʿarim), including a discussion of its traditional identification with Kiriath-Jearim and a preliminary report of both the recent archaeological survey and G. Barkay’s salvage excavation, which was carried out in the winter of 1995-1996. Significantly, this paper provides the first modern report on the nature of the archaeology of Kiriath-Jearim (Deir el-ʿÂzar), which includes occupation from the Neolithic period until modern times.
The Photo Companion to the Bible is a unique collection of digital photographs that illustrate th... more The Photo Companion to the Bible is a unique collection of digital photographs that illustrate the biblical text verse by verse. The uploaded PDF is a sample from Judges 4. See https://www.bibleplaces.com/judges-photo-companion-to-the-bible/ for full version.
The Photo Companion to the Bible is a unique collection of digital photographs that illustrate th... more The Photo Companion to the Bible is a unique collection of digital photographs that illustrate the biblical text verse by verse. The uploaded PDF is a sample from Joshua 2. See https://www.bibleplaces.com/ruth-photo-companion-to-the-bible/ for full version.
The Photo Companion to the Bible is a unique collection of digital photographs that illustrate th... more The Photo Companion to the Bible is a unique collection of digital photographs that illustrate the biblical text verse by verse. The uploaded PDF is a sample from Ruth 2:1-4. See https://www.bibleplaces.com/ruth-photo-companion-to-the-bible/ for full version.
The Regnal Chronology of the Kings of Judah and Israel: An Illustrated Guide is directed at stude... more The Regnal Chronology of the Kings of Judah and Israel: An Illustrated Guide is directed at students and academics of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament who have a specific interest in the chronology of the biblical Kings of Judah and Israel. The chronology is not my personal system, but that of Edwin R. Thiele who developed his chronology in the 1940s and 1950s and published widely on the subject. The most current edition of his work is known as “The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings,” which was published in various editions up until 1983. I have arranged the chart into a series of eight 50-year panes that are accompanied with a breakout chart of all of the available regnal details of each king. Wherever possible, I have included extra-biblical information to supplement and illustrate the chronology. This also includes a brief summary of each of the major intersections with the major imperial powers of Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon.
In this study, I have endeavored to provide a date for the town lists of Judah and Benjamin, whic... more In this study, I have endeavored to provide a date for the town lists of Judah and Benjamin, which are recorded in Joshua 15:21-62 and 18:21-28. In connection with this, I have examined and offered a possible candidate for each of the sites mentioned in the town lists. I have attempted to include all of the available, relevant archaeological data for each of the toponyms and regions under discussion with the purpose of determining the overall date of the presumed town register list/administrative division that lies behind the town lists. From a historical perspective and following Alt’s original suggestion (1925), it would seem logical to conclude that these town lists are reflective of an administrative division of the kingdom of Judah dating to a period later than the Solomonic administrative division in the 10th century BCE/early Iron IIA (1 Kgs 4:8-19). Likewise, the available archaeological material of Judah would seem to make it very clear that the extant town lists for Judah and Benjamin should be dated to the Iron II, as less than half of the sites mentioned in the detailed town lists possess remains from the Late Bronze and/or Iron I.
Since Alt, the dating of the town lists of Judah and Benjamin has been heavily debated with opinions ranging throughout the Iron II and Persian periods, including the 9th century BCE/Jehoshaphat (e.g., Cross and Wright), 8th century BCE/Uzziah (Aharoni), early 7th century BCE/Manasseh (Barkay), late 7th century BCE/Josiah (Alt and Na’aman), and late 6th-5th century/Persian period (de Vos). The question of the overall date of the list is also related to the current form of the division as reflected in Joshua 15:21-62 and 18:21-28 and the presumed underlying administrative source from which this text seems to have been derived. This form or system clearly included a separation of distinct regions (i.e., Negeb, Shephelah, hill country, Wilderness, and Benjamin) and districts or sub-districts within these regions. The purpose of the administrative division seems to have been related to both taxation, as reflected especially in the Arad Ostraca, and perhaps military organization, as has been suggested in the presumed four- fold division of the LMLK seal impressions. Barkay has suggested that there is a connection the administrative division and a series of early 7th century BCE fiscal bulla that include a number of towns appearing in the town lists (2011). This evidence would seem to establish the terminus post quem of the administrative division. In light of this and the numerous compelling arguments of Na’aman (e.g., 1991, 2005), I acknowledge the possibility that the town lists of Judah and Benjamin may be reflective of the 7th century BCE. Despite this, in incorporating archaeological studies that were unavailable to past researchers, I conclude that the settlement pattern of 9th century BCE Judah largely matches the settlement pattern in the town lists, as noted especially in the regions of the Negeb (including the Negeb Highlands), Shephelah and southern hill country. Subsequently, and while it cannot be stated with certainty, the 9th century BCE may also be the period of the original compilation of the administrative town register list behind the Judah and Benjamin town lists of Joshua 15:21-62 and 18:21-28.
M.A. Thesis - Bar Ilan University
In this thesis I examine the reign of Jehoshaphat of Judah ... more M.A. Thesis - Bar Ilan University
In this thesis I examine the reign of Jehoshaphat of Judah by using the available archaeological and textual data. Chapter One serves as the introduction to the thesis. In Chapter Two, I discuss the historical setting of Judah’s neighbors by focusing primarily on Omride Israel and its relationship to Phoenicia and Aram. This discussion addressed the set of historical circumstances that brought about the cessation of Israelite-Judahite hostility during the reigns of Omri and Asa. This chapter also addressed some textual and historical issues associated with Israel and Judah’s relationship to Moab (2 Kings 3; 2 Chron. 20:1-30).
Chapter Three includes a textual analysis and a historical reconstruction of the Battle of Ramoth-Gilead (1 Kings 22:1-36). This chapter also serves as a starting point for a discussion of the larger historical setting in which Jehoshaphat reigned. Throughout this chapter, I address several issues related to a historical understanding of this text in relation to the Tel Dan Stele and the larger historical landscape of Aramean-Israelite relations. I also deal with the Chronicler’s version of the battle (2 Chron. 18) and discuss the historical value of the few expansions from the Kings’ account. Since this text is often used as evidence for determining that Jehoshaphat was a vassal to Ahab, I also address the arguments associated with this line of thinking.
Chapter Four analyzes Jehoshaphat’s reign in 1 Kings 22:41-50. This analysis is the most important textual element of this thesis and lays the foundation for the archaeological discussion, which follows. Throughout the chapter, I suggest a positive reading of the chronistic text that accepts the general historicity of Judah and Israel’s alliance (1 Kings 22:44), Judah’s domination of Edom (2 Kings 22:47), and the reality of Jehoshaphat’s Aravah activity that stretched to the Red Sea and beyond. I endeavor to show that this view is at odds with several recent assessments that view the late 9th or early 8th centuries BCE as the moment of Judah’s rise to prominence in these regions.
Finally, Chapter Five deals with the archaeological remains of Judah in the late Iron IIA (i.e. the 9th century BCE). My examination largely avoids archaeological survey material and focuses on published and some unpublished archaeological sites in Judah that possessed Iron IIA material. My discussion is limited to the regions of Benjamin, the Shephelah, the Negev and the Aravah. Together with the preceding chapter, this section serves as the core data of my study where I pull together textual and archaeological source material. In addition to primary material, I interact with a large body of older and up-to-date secondary literature associated with Judah in the Iron IIA. Throughout this final chapter I address many different historical geographical issues surrounding the identification and political affiliation with the sites in question. In the future, I hope to continue analyzing this material by including archaeological survey and excavation material from the regions discussed and the southern Hill Country of Judah. Altogether, an analysis of this data across these chapters has brought me to three main conclusions (Chapter Six) regarding the nature of Judah during the reign of Jehoshaphat in the mid-9th century BCE.
First, the first half of the 9th century BCE should be seen as a period of prosperity and increased building activity in the regions of Benjamin, the Shephelah, the Negev and the Aravah of Judah. This is especially the case in the Shephelah and the Negev, This period of prosperity lasted until the mid-late 9th century BCE when Aramean activity under Hazael destroyed many sites of western Judah (2 Kings 12:17). This aggression, which can now be traced across Israel, Philistia and Judah, seems to have halted and transformed most of the geo-political realities that preceded Hazael’s rise to power.
Second, the kingdoms of Judah and Israel in the mid-9th century BCE should be considered as geo-political peers who took part in an alliance (2 Kings 8:26) between two nations on equal footing and not a vassal-suzerain treaty. This alliance was likely enacted for both military and financial reasons, such as Israel’s domination of Moab (livestock (2 Kings 3:1; Mesha Stele)), Judah’s subjugation of Edom (copper (2 Kings 22:47)), and Israel’s alliance with Phoenician Tyre and Sidon (1 Kings 16:31).
Third, the complex trade realities of the late Iron IIA, as reflected in both the archaeological and the biblical record, point to the reality of friendly trade networks between Judah, Israel, Philistine Gath and Phoenicia. The absence of hostility between these polities in the biblical record underscores this point.
Additionally, I have dealt with many different textual, geographical and historical nuances associated with mid-9th century BCE Judah. It is my hope that this nuanced study will serve as a positive academic contribution and a good starting point for future study of Judah in the period in question.
Encyclopedia entry on the site of MMST (LMLK seal impression toponym) for the Lexham Bible Dictio... more Encyclopedia entry on the site of MMST (LMLK seal impression toponym) for the Lexham Bible Dictionary
This is a chart of the popular view that the ten Egyptian plagues should be related to ten specif... more This is a chart of the popular view that the ten Egyptian plagues should be related to ten specific Egyptian deities. I am not entirely convinced by the argument, but there are some striking parallels with the first and last couple of the plagues. This chart is meant to be used as a classroom resource for illustrating this widespread interpretation. All images are in the public domain.
This interactive map is an archaeological database containing the sites discussed in the unpubli... more This interactive map is an archaeological database containing the sites discussed in the unpublished dissertation "A Historical Geography of The Administrative Division of Judah: The Town Lists of Judah and Benjamin in Joshua 15:21-62 and 18:21-28" written by Chris McKinny at Bar Ilan University in 2016.
This map includes the sites discussed in the unpublished dissertation "A Historical Geography of ... more This map includes the sites discussed in the unpublished dissertation "A Historical Geography of The Administrative Division of Judah: The Town Lists of Judah and Benjamin in Joshua 15:21-62 and 18:21-28" written by Chris McKinny at Bar Ilan University in 2016.
A section of A. Musil's Karte Von Arabia (1906) with graphics delineating the boundary markers wi... more A section of A. Musil's Karte Von Arabia (1906) with graphics delineating the boundary markers with their accepted identifications from various biblical descriptions of the Canaanite/Judahite southern border.
In this interactive map, I have compiled all of the towns in the list and provided the known arch... more In this interactive map, I have compiled all of the towns in the list and provided the known archaeological details about the site in a compact form. Wherever possible I have linked a low-resolution photo of the site. Of the 34 towns in the list, 30 can be identified with relative certainty. A detailed bibliography relating to the archaeological publications cited within each site can be located at the link below.
This NEW unit provides a platform for scholars to present original research related to the histor... more This NEW unit provides a platform for scholars to present original research related to the historical geography of the biblical world. While we anticipate many studies related to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament and the New Testament, we welcome studies of related regions and texts as well. "Historical Geography of the Biblical World" is open to any historical geographical issue related to the lands and peoples of the Bible.
In 2012, two early Iron Age temples in the region of Judah were discovered. The first of these te... more In 2012, two early Iron Age temples in the region of Judah were discovered. The first of these temples was uncovered at Tel Beth Shemesh in the Judean Shephelah near the border between the Israelites and the Philistines. The second temple is from Tel Moẓa in the Judean Hill Country near one of the main routes between Jerusalem and the Shephelah/Coastal Plain. According to the excavators, the Tel Beth Shemesh temple dates to the 11th century BCE and the Tel Moẓa temple was active from c. 10th-9th centuries BCE. In this paper, I will argue that the presence of these temples may be connected with the movements of the Ark of Yahweh that are detailed in the book of Samuel (1 Sam 6:11-7:1; 2 Sam 6:5-11). I suggest that the Beth-shemesh temple should be associated with the return of the Ark of Yahweh to Israel, and the subsequent divine execution of some of the city’s inhabitants (1 Sam 6:11-7:1). In addition, I will offer the possibility that the Iron IIA temple from Moẓa should be linked to the journey of the Ark of Yahweh to Jerusalem in 2 Sam 6:5-11 and, specifically, the “house of Obed-edom the Gittite.” The paper will also discuss the role of Israelite cult sites in the formation and preservation of their national cultural memory.
There are three instances of toponyms based on לבנ (Hebrew – “white”) in the Bible. These include... more There are three instances of toponyms based on לבנ (Hebrew – “white”) in the Bible. These include Libnah/Laban of the wilderness Sinai wanderings (Num. 33:20; Deut. 1:1), Lebonah of Ephraim (Judg. 21:19), and Libnah of the Judean Shephelah (e.g. Josh. 10:29-31). Notably, the latter two are possibly preserved in Arabic toponyms from 19th century Palestine. These toponyms were recorded with varying spellings in such cartographic projects as the Van De Velde’s Map of the Holy Land (1858), Warren’s unpublished Reconnaissance of the Plain of Philistia (1867), and Conder and Kitchener’s Survey of Western Palestine (1890). Using these and other cartographic sources as a foundation for our discussion, we will analyze the etymology and site identifications of Lebonah of Ephraim and Libnah of the Shephelah in connection with their occurrences in the various post-biblical sources with the purpose of understanding the linguistic development of the לבנ toponyms from the biblical period to pre-modern times.
Since the beginning of archaeological research in the Levant, Late Bronze Age cultic practice has... more Since the beginning of archaeological research in the Levant, Late Bronze Age cultic practice has been the focus of many investigations stemming from various avenues of research. With a few exceptions, the core archaeological data has come from cultic complexes that were excavated in the early 20th century (e.g. Lachish). This study will present finds that were discovered recently at Tel Burna, a site that is clearly one of the key Late Bronze sites in the Shephelah, as it commands the surrounding landscape and trade routes. In Area B, a massive 13th century BCE complex was exposed with unique finds related to religious practices at the site. The finds include a row of pithoi (some imported) set into pockets in the bedrock; two mask fragments; burnt bones; and unique Cypriot imported pottery, such as a vessel with three cups joined together, which is likely of cultic orientation. Moreover, the building technique of the complex also suggests that this area should be interpreted as a cultic structure. In turn, we will discuss the building plan and the distribution of artifacts in order to gain a better understanding of the people who used it and the deity or deities that were worshiped inside of it. Through these finds we will reflect on our understanding of Late Bronze Age cult, by comparing our excavation data to both the existing archaeological record and recent scientific studies on Late Bronze Age cultic activity.
This paper discusses the history of research at Deir el-Azhar, including a discussion of its iden... more This paper discusses the history of research at Deir el-Azhar, including a discussion of its identification with Kiriath-Jearim, and provide a preliminary report of both the recent archaeological survey and G. Barkay’s salvage excavation. Significantly, this paper provides the first modern report on the nature of the archaeology of Kiriath-Jearim (Deir el-Azhar), which includes occupation from the Neolithic period until modern times.
“Benjamin is a ravenous wolf, in the morning devouring the prey and at evening dividing the spoil... more “Benjamin is a ravenous wolf, in the morning devouring the prey and at evening dividing the spoil.” (Genesis 49:27)
Paper presented at 5th Annual Benjamin Conference in Honor of Hanan Eshel, October 19, 2014
Since Alt’s original proposal in the early 20th century (1925), most scholars have followed his opinion that the tribal allotments in the book of Joshua reflect earlier traditions from the time of the Judges or early monarchy and that the tribal city-lists dated to some point in the divided monarchy (e.g. Cross and Wright 1956; Kallai-Kleinmann 1958; Kallai 1986; Aharoni 1959; 1979; Na’aman 1991; 2005; Rainey 1983; 2006; Tappy 2008). In particular, discussion has revolved around the specific dating of the Judahite and Benjaminite lists with opinions ranging from the time of Jehoshaphat (9th century BCE), Uzziah/Hezekiah (8th century BCE), and Josiah (7th century BCE). In this paper I will examine one of the more critical details in this discussion – the northern border of Benjamin as defined by the boundary description and the city lists. Specifically, I will examine the archaeological and historical evidences for the identifications of the “wilderness Beth-aven” (Josh. 18:12-13) in the boundary description and Emek-keziz and Zemaraim of the cities of eastern Benjamin (Josh. 18:21-24) in the city list.
Uploads
Videos by Chris McKinny
Google Earth map: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LlCj3WCCoozJSu1rRosK9_sZ5SlIfljq/view?usp=sharing
British Mandate map: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16P9kYkIXA-VBLnjPP_wf4aU78WTaBflY/view?usp=sharing
Books by Chris McKinny
Papers by Chris McKinny
Previous surveys at Khirbat el-‘Atar indicated that this site was also occupied during the Iron Age II, and its topography is similar to that of Tel Burna. In November 2020, a highresolution survey was conducted at Khirbat el-‘Atar to better determine the periods of occupation at the site, explore the nature of its enclosed summit, and conduct a preliminary comparison with the Tel Burna excavations. Although no excavation
has been held at Khirbat el-‘Atar, the survey’s results allow us to produce an initial exploratory reconstruction of the site’s occupational sequences during the Iron Age II and enrich our understanding of the geopolitical changes in the region.
Age was one of the two main periods during which the site was inhabited. In
this paper, we will present the various finds dating to this period, focusing on
the public building that was discovered on its western side. The building and
the finds provide a window into the cult practice of the period, which reflected
the international relationship and the character of the material culture of the
people of the Land of Israel in the Late Bronze Age.
world. In this study, we present and discuss two miniature votive vessels and
other related ritual deposits from a Late Bronze cultic enclosure at Tel Burna,
Israel. We conclude that the Cypriot character of many of the finds (including
one of the two votive objects) might indicate that the cult centre was established
by merchants during the Late Bronze Age.
Google Earth map: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LlCj3WCCoozJSu1rRosK9_sZ5SlIfljq/view?usp=sharing
British Mandate map: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16P9kYkIXA-VBLnjPP_wf4aU78WTaBflY/view?usp=sharing
Previous surveys at Khirbat el-‘Atar indicated that this site was also occupied during the Iron Age II, and its topography is similar to that of Tel Burna. In November 2020, a highresolution survey was conducted at Khirbat el-‘Atar to better determine the periods of occupation at the site, explore the nature of its enclosed summit, and conduct a preliminary comparison with the Tel Burna excavations. Although no excavation
has been held at Khirbat el-‘Atar, the survey’s results allow us to produce an initial exploratory reconstruction of the site’s occupational sequences during the Iron Age II and enrich our understanding of the geopolitical changes in the region.
Age was one of the two main periods during which the site was inhabited. In
this paper, we will present the various finds dating to this period, focusing on
the public building that was discovered on its western side. The building and
the finds provide a window into the cult practice of the period, which reflected
the international relationship and the character of the material culture of the
people of the Land of Israel in the Late Bronze Age.
world. In this study, we present and discuss two miniature votive vessels and
other related ritual deposits from a Late Bronze cultic enclosure at Tel Burna,
Israel. We conclude that the Cypriot character of many of the finds (including
one of the two votive objects) might indicate that the cult centre was established
by merchants during the Late Bronze Age.
Levantine archaeological research, with imported vessels generally playing
a significant role in the ceramic assemblage. While the majority of these
vessels are found repeatedly at many different sites, there are cases where
a rare find sheds new light on the way in which trade patterns are perceived.
Such is the case with two fully restored pithoi found in a Late Bronze IIB
building at Tel Burna. This paper presents the context in which the pithoi
were uncovered, followed by a study of the vessels themselves, including
their typology, provenance, volume and contents, as well as the nature of
Late Bronze Age trade in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Since Alt, the dating of the town lists of Judah and Benjamin has been heavily debated with opinions ranging throughout the Iron II and Persian periods, including the 9th century BCE/Jehoshaphat (e.g., Cross and Wright), 8th century BCE/Uzziah (Aharoni), early 7th century BCE/Manasseh (Barkay), late 7th century BCE/Josiah (Alt and Na’aman), and late 6th-5th century/Persian period (de Vos). The question of the overall date of the list is also related to the current form of the division as reflected in Joshua 15:21-62 and 18:21-28 and the presumed underlying administrative source from which this text seems to have been derived. This form or system clearly included a separation of distinct regions (i.e., Negeb, Shephelah, hill country, Wilderness, and Benjamin) and districts or sub-districts within these regions. The purpose of the administrative division seems to have been related to both taxation, as reflected especially in the Arad Ostraca, and perhaps military organization, as has been suggested in the presumed four- fold division of the LMLK seal impressions. Barkay has suggested that there is a connection the administrative division and a series of early 7th century BCE fiscal bulla that include a number of towns appearing in the town lists (2011). This evidence would seem to establish the terminus post quem of the administrative division. In light of this and the numerous compelling arguments of Na’aman (e.g., 1991, 2005), I acknowledge the possibility that the town lists of Judah and Benjamin may be reflective of the 7th century BCE. Despite this, in incorporating archaeological studies that were unavailable to past researchers, I conclude that the settlement pattern of 9th century BCE Judah largely matches the settlement pattern in the town lists, as noted especially in the regions of the Negeb (including the Negeb Highlands), Shephelah and southern hill country. Subsequently, and while it cannot be stated with certainty, the 9th century BCE may also be the period of the original compilation of the administrative town register list behind the Judah and Benjamin town lists of Joshua 15:21-62 and 18:21-28.
In this thesis I examine the reign of Jehoshaphat of Judah by using the available archaeological and textual data. Chapter One serves as the introduction to the thesis. In Chapter Two, I discuss the historical setting of Judah’s neighbors by focusing primarily on Omride Israel and its relationship to Phoenicia and Aram. This discussion addressed the set of historical circumstances that brought about the cessation of Israelite-Judahite hostility during the reigns of Omri and Asa. This chapter also addressed some textual and historical issues associated with Israel and Judah’s relationship to Moab (2 Kings 3; 2 Chron. 20:1-30).
Chapter Three includes a textual analysis and a historical reconstruction of the Battle of Ramoth-Gilead (1 Kings 22:1-36). This chapter also serves as a starting point for a discussion of the larger historical setting in which Jehoshaphat reigned. Throughout this chapter, I address several issues related to a historical understanding of this text in relation to the Tel Dan Stele and the larger historical landscape of Aramean-Israelite relations. I also deal with the Chronicler’s version of the battle (2 Chron. 18) and discuss the historical value of the few expansions from the Kings’ account. Since this text is often used as evidence for determining that Jehoshaphat was a vassal to Ahab, I also address the arguments associated with this line of thinking.
Chapter Four analyzes Jehoshaphat’s reign in 1 Kings 22:41-50. This analysis is the most important textual element of this thesis and lays the foundation for the archaeological discussion, which follows. Throughout the chapter, I suggest a positive reading of the chronistic text that accepts the general historicity of Judah and Israel’s alliance (1 Kings 22:44), Judah’s domination of Edom (2 Kings 22:47), and the reality of Jehoshaphat’s Aravah activity that stretched to the Red Sea and beyond. I endeavor to show that this view is at odds with several recent assessments that view the late 9th or early 8th centuries BCE as the moment of Judah’s rise to prominence in these regions.
Finally, Chapter Five deals with the archaeological remains of Judah in the late Iron IIA (i.e. the 9th century BCE). My examination largely avoids archaeological survey material and focuses on published and some unpublished archaeological sites in Judah that possessed Iron IIA material. My discussion is limited to the regions of Benjamin, the Shephelah, the Negev and the Aravah. Together with the preceding chapter, this section serves as the core data of my study where I pull together textual and archaeological source material. In addition to primary material, I interact with a large body of older and up-to-date secondary literature associated with Judah in the Iron IIA. Throughout this final chapter I address many different historical geographical issues surrounding the identification and political affiliation with the sites in question. In the future, I hope to continue analyzing this material by including archaeological survey and excavation material from the regions discussed and the southern Hill Country of Judah. Altogether, an analysis of this data across these chapters has brought me to three main conclusions (Chapter Six) regarding the nature of Judah during the reign of Jehoshaphat in the mid-9th century BCE.
First, the first half of the 9th century BCE should be seen as a period of prosperity and increased building activity in the regions of Benjamin, the Shephelah, the Negev and the Aravah of Judah. This is especially the case in the Shephelah and the Negev, This period of prosperity lasted until the mid-late 9th century BCE when Aramean activity under Hazael destroyed many sites of western Judah (2 Kings 12:17). This aggression, which can now be traced across Israel, Philistia and Judah, seems to have halted and transformed most of the geo-political realities that preceded Hazael’s rise to power.
Second, the kingdoms of Judah and Israel in the mid-9th century BCE should be considered as geo-political peers who took part in an alliance (2 Kings 8:26) between two nations on equal footing and not a vassal-suzerain treaty. This alliance was likely enacted for both military and financial reasons, such as Israel’s domination of Moab (livestock (2 Kings 3:1; Mesha Stele)), Judah’s subjugation of Edom (copper (2 Kings 22:47)), and Israel’s alliance with Phoenician Tyre and Sidon (1 Kings 16:31).
Third, the complex trade realities of the late Iron IIA, as reflected in both the archaeological and the biblical record, point to the reality of friendly trade networks between Judah, Israel, Philistine Gath and Phoenicia. The absence of hostility between these polities in the biblical record underscores this point.
Additionally, I have dealt with many different textual, geographical and historical nuances associated with mid-9th century BCE Judah. It is my hope that this nuanced study will serve as a positive academic contribution and a good starting point for future study of Judah in the period in question.
The interactive database can be accessed at this link https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?dg=feature&mid=1BiQioOEsPgWiapDz_nKYmtMFkgM or by clicking "links."
Map created by Chris McKinny © using the Satellite Bible Atlas (created by W. Schlegel ©) as the base map.
To submit proposals please go to https://www.sbl-site.org/meetings/Congresses_CallForPaperDetails.aspx?MeetingId=37&VolunteerUnitId=790. You must first be a member of SBL.
Please note: the CFP closes on 11 March at 23:59 Eastern Standard Time.
For more details please contact Chris McKinny (chrismckinny@gmail.com) or David Moster (davidmoster@gmail.com)
Paper presented at 5th Annual Benjamin Conference in Honor of Hanan Eshel, October 19, 2014
Since Alt’s original proposal in the early 20th century (1925), most scholars have followed his opinion that the tribal allotments in the book of Joshua reflect earlier traditions from the time of the Judges or early monarchy and that the tribal city-lists dated to some point in the divided monarchy (e.g. Cross and Wright 1956; Kallai-Kleinmann 1958; Kallai 1986; Aharoni 1959; 1979; Na’aman 1991; 2005; Rainey 1983; 2006; Tappy 2008). In particular, discussion has revolved around the specific dating of the Judahite and Benjaminite lists with opinions ranging from the time of Jehoshaphat (9th century BCE), Uzziah/Hezekiah (8th century BCE), and Josiah (7th century BCE). In this paper I will examine one of the more critical details in this discussion – the northern border of Benjamin as defined by the boundary description and the city lists. Specifically, I will examine the archaeological and historical evidences for the identifications of the “wilderness Beth-aven” (Josh. 18:12-13) in the boundary description and Emek-keziz and Zemaraim of the cities of eastern Benjamin (Josh. 18:21-24) in the city list.