Transition from Bronze to Iron Age

The move from LB III to Iron IThe move from LB III to Iron I

Subdivisions of Iron Age Until mid-sixtiesUntil mid-sixties

– Iron Age I: 1200 - 920/900 B.C.E. Iron Age I: 1200 - 920/900 B.C.E. – Iron Age II: 920 - 586 B.C.E.Iron Age II: 920 - 586 B.C.E.

Aharoni and Amiran (1958 following Hazor)Aharoni and Amiran (1958 following Hazor)– Iron Age I: 1200 - 1000 B.C.E. Iron Age I: 1200 - 1000 B.C.E. – Iron Age II: 1000 - 840 B.C.E.Iron Age II: 1000 - 840 B.C.E.– Iron Age III: 840 - 586 B.C.E.Iron Age III: 840 - 586 B.C.E.

Aharoni and Amiran is from the article we Aharoni and Amiran is from the article we read earlier; what were their reasons?read earlier; what were their reasons?

Historical Reasons for Subdivisions

notice that each of the systems uses key notice that each of the systems uses key historical dateshistorical dates– 12001200– 10001000– 920920– 840840– 586586

this is because historical events change the this is because historical events change the material culture in many casesmaterial culture in many cases

Historical events near the end of the Bronze Age

Hittite empire is in declineHittite empire is in decline Egyptian empire is in declineEgyptian empire is in decline many destructions in Hittite and Egyptian many destructions in Hittite and Egyptian

controlled areascontrolled areas sites in Canaan are also destroyedsites in Canaan are also destroyed reasons are probably famine and external reasons are probably famine and external

forces that defeat these peopleforces that defeat these people Thus, the international trade contacts that Thus, the international trade contacts that

characterized the Late Bronze Age die outcharacterized the Late Bronze Age die out

Origination of new peoples:Origination of new peoples:– IsraelIsrael– PhilistiaPhilistia– EdomEdom– MoabMoab– Phoenicians in CanaanPhoenicians in Canaan

Importation of Mycenean and Cypriot Importation of Mycenean and Cypriot pottery ceasespottery ceases– trade routes were affected, so imports falltrade routes were affected, so imports fall– international contact falls offinternational contact falls off

“Transition Sites” Many sites were destroyed at end of the Many sites were destroyed at end of the

Late Bronze Age and then resettled Late Bronze Age and then resettled immediately with an Egyptian influence, immediately with an Egyptian influence, but there were not “imports”but there were not “imports”

Nice example: LachishNice example: Lachish– Stratum VII: Fosse Temple (LB w/ imports)Stratum VII: Fosse Temple (LB w/ imports)– Stratum VI: Iron Age Ia without importsStratum VI: Iron Age Ia without imports

Lachish can be used for both end of Iron Lachish can be used for both end of Iron Age in 1200 and in 1150Age in 1200 and in 1150

Area SArea SFosse TempleFosse Temple

Fosse Temple

Dated to Late Bronze AgeDated to Late Bronze Age– had Mycen. importshad Mycen. imports– had pottery corresponding to Lachish Level VI?had pottery corresponding to Lachish Level VI?

British excavation dated to = Level VIBritish excavation dated to = Level VI Tel Aviv: new information showed that it Tel Aviv: new information showed that it

was equal with Level VIIwas equal with Level VII

Isometric Drawingof Fosse Temple

Temple at Beth Shean

QuickTime™ and aAnimation decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Lachish Area S: Level VIILachish Area S: Level VII

Area S: Level VIArea S: Level VI

Relative Chronology British excavations related Fosse Temple III British excavations related Fosse Temple III

to Level VIto Level VI Tel Aviv excavations showed that Fosse Tel Aviv excavations showed that Fosse

Temple III related to Level VII in Area STemple III related to Level VII in Area S Culture of both strata was “Canaanite” as Culture of both strata was “Canaanite” as

well as the architecturewell as the architecture the city was unfortified in both stratathe city was unfortified in both strata Tel Aviv: found absolute date for Level VITel Aviv: found absolute date for Level VI

Cartouche of Rameses III

Importance of cartouche Rameses III reigned 1182 - 1151Rameses III reigned 1182 - 1151 cartouche found on bronze object sealed by cartouche found on bronze object sealed by

destruction of Level VIdestruction of Level VI therefore, destruction of Level VI must have therefore, destruction of Level VI must have

been later than 1182been later than 1182 need to allow time for object to be made, need to allow time for object to be made,

imported to Lachish, go out of use and break, imported to Lachish, go out of use and break, and finally be discarded in “trash”and finally be discarded in “trash”

thus, a date around 1150 seems probablethus, a date around 1150 seems probable

Absolute Chronology

later than Level VI: gap in occupationlater than Level VI: gap in occupation Level VI:Level VI:

– unfortified cityunfortified city– Acropolis TempleAcropolis Temple– public buildingpublic building– destroyed by fire ca. 1150destroyed by fire ca. 1150

Level VII:Level VII:– Fosse Temple III and unfortifed cityFosse Temple III and unfortifed city– destroyed by fire earlier than Level VIdestroyed by fire earlier than Level VI– maybe??? ca. 1200maybe??? ca. 1200

Division of LBA and Iron I

Lachish does not have My imports in Level Lachish does not have My imports in Level VI (= destruction date of ca. 1150)VI (= destruction date of ca. 1150)

material culture and architecture of both material culture and architecture of both strata are similar even though Egyptian / strata are similar even though Egyptian / Canaanite distinction madeCanaanite distinction made

Thus, I think that lack of My. imports is Thus, I think that lack of My. imports is part of the end of the Late Bronze, but not part of the end of the Late Bronze, but not dividing line between LBA and Iron Agedividing line between LBA and Iron Age

Reasons for 1150 as end of LB 1. Egypt rules until after 11501. Egypt rules until after 1150 2. Canaanite cities existed until ca. 11502. Canaanite cities existed until ca. 1150 3. continuation of Canaanite material culture3. continuation of Canaanite material culture 4. import of My. pottery: end ca. 1200 4. import of My. pottery: end ca. 1200

should be viewed as localized to those areasshould be viewed as localized to those areas 5. Iron appears in Late Bronze Age, but only 5. Iron appears in Late Bronze Age, but only

extensively used in Canaan after 1150extensively used in Canaan after 1150 6. intensive settlement in highlands by 6. intensive settlement in highlands by

Israelites starts around 1200Israelites starts around 1200– this supports earlier date for end of Late Bronzethis supports earlier date for end of Late Bronze

Conclusions relevant for us

continuity with Canaanite culture at end of continuity with Canaanite culture at end of Late Bronze and start of 12th centuryLate Bronze and start of 12th century

many destructions in beginning of 12th many destructions in beginning of 12th century, but with rebuilding by same century, but with rebuilding by same peoples under Egyptian controlpeoples under Egyptian control

around 1150, Egyptian and Hittite empires around 1150, Egyptian and Hittite empires fall into decline and leave a vacuum of fall into decline and leave a vacuum of power in Canaanpower in Canaan

Iron I Period Settlement

Settlement goes up drasticallySettlement goes up drastically it is hard to account for this settlement by it is hard to account for this settlement by

internal revolts and settlements in hill internal revolts and settlements in hill countrycountry

it seems that some outside came in an it seems that some outside came in an settled in the hill countrysettled in the hill country

Number of Sites

Area of Settlement (hectares)

Settlement from inside

Material culture does not change drasticallyMaterial culture does not change drastically Look at Stager’s criteria for Wednesday in Look at Stager’s criteria for Wednesday in

this regardthis regard Pottery is hard to separatePottery is hard to separate Architecture is hard to separateArchitecture is hard to separate