To determine the species of intestinal parasites present in 7th century BC high-status residents of Jerusalem and to expose the history of regional health and sanitary conditions. Materials: Fifteen sediment samples were collected from... more
To determine the species of intestinal parasites present in 7th century BC high-status residents of Jerusalem and to expose the history of regional health and sanitary conditions. Materials: Fifteen sediment samples were collected from the cesspit below a stone toilet seat found at the site of Armon Hanatziv, southern Jerusalem. The toilet installation was located in a garden adjacent to a monumental structure with extraordinary architectural elements. Methods: A light microscope was used to identify and measure the eggs. Results: The presence of four intestinal parasite egg taxa was detected: Trichuris trichiura (whipworm), Taenia sp. (beef/pork tapeworm), Ascaris lumbricoides (roundworm), and Enterobius vermicularis (pinworm). This is the earliest appearance of roundworm and pinworm in the ancient Israel parasitological record. Conclusions: Findings reveal that intestinal parasitic diseases most likely caused by poor sanitary conditions were a human problem in the Late Iron Age of Israel, affecting even high-status groups. Significance: The study demonstrates the potential of archaeoparasitological investigations to expand our knowledge of the origin and history of regional infections. Moreover, parasitological evidence enabled us to determine the purpose of the cubical perforated stone artifacts (stone toilet seats rather than cultic objects as currently debated). Limitations: The eggs of some parasite taxa are less durable, so may theoretically be absent due to selective preservation. Suggestions for Further Research: Future excavations of ancient Israel should include archaeoparasitological studies of rare toilet installations to prevent information loss of regional history of diseases and to better understand their archaeological context.
This article will discuss the architectural plan of a burial system located in the lower part of Hinnom Valley (AkelDama, or Wadi A-Rababi) in Jerusalem, as well as several aspects related to the burial customs it represents. The Hinnom... more
This article will discuss the architectural plan of a burial system located in the lower part of Hinnom Valley (AkelDama, or Wadi A-Rababi) in Jerusalem, as well as several aspects related to the burial customs it represents. The Hinnom Valley, South of the Old City of Jerusalem, contains one of the Jerusalem's riches assembles of the rock cut tombs.
The burial system was carved in the hard limestone (Malekke), near to the Greek Orthodox convent of St. Onouphrius (Ὀνούφριος, AkelDama). This slope was used as one of the important cemeteries of Jerusalem during the Second Temple period, accommodated some complex and elaborate burial caves and has attracted researchers already during the 19th century. The plan of the burial cave consists of three burial chambers arranged in a stepped line (Chambers I–III). Another chamber (Chamber IV) was carved in a lower level, underneath Chamber I and II. The cave includes well known characteristics of Jerusalem burial caves as kokhim (burial loculi), arcosolium, and even elevated head supports which are rarer. According to the plan of the tomb and a few fragments of ossuaries the cave seems to have been carved during the 1st century CE.
A fragment of a Late Roman glass bottles (candlestick Type) reflect that this burial cave had a later reuse in the Late Roman period, probably by non-Jews. To this late phase one may associate the remains of burnt bones in Chamber II. These may be evidence for the known (though not common) practice of cremation in the polytheism population of Jerusalem in the late Roman Period.
Since the time of their discovery, archaeologists and art historians accepted the Samaria ivories to be of Phoenician origin. Considered alien and idiosyncratic artifacts in Samaria, the ivories were deemed unrepresentative of local... more
Since the time of their discovery, archaeologists and art historians accepted the Samaria ivories to be of Phoenician origin. Considered alien and idiosyncratic artifacts in Samaria, the ivories were deemed unrepresentative of local material culture. As a result, other Iron Age ivories subsequently discovered in the Levant were also regarded as Phoenician. This article aims to shed light on the thinking behind the ethnic labeling of these ivories, and its lingering, detrimental implications that prevent finds from being viewed as indigenous material culture. A brief review of relevant archaeological finds from both old and recent excavations at the sites of Jerusalem, Rǝḥov, and Hazor will show that there is in fact substantial evidence to anchor Iron Age ivories within the southern Levant. In the process, new suggestions regarding continuity from the Bronze to the Iron Age will be made by addressing the use of different raw materials and the repertoire of images depicted on inlays.
The purpose of the present article is to analyze the material culture from around the turn of the Common Era brought to light by way of archaeological excavations taken place in the old city of Jerusalem so as to shed light on matters... more
The purpose of the present article is to analyze the material culture from around the turn of the Common Era brought to light by way of archaeological excavations taken place in the old city of Jerusalem so as to shed light on matters like economy and circulation of goods and people (Jews and non Jews) in that city during the time of Jesus and the early Christians.
O presente artigo tem por objetivo analisar as evidências da cultura material datadas dos séculos I a.C. e I d.C. trazidas à superfície por escavações arqueológicas realizadas na cidade velha de Jerusalém, de maneira a jogar luz sobre a questão da economia e da circulação de bens e pessoas (judeus e não judeus) naquele espaço urbano no tempo de Jesus e dos primeiros cristãos.
Jerusalem in Bible and Archaeology: The First Temple Period (ed. A. Killebrew and A. Vaughn; SBL Symposium Series 18; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003) 307–326